biblestudying.net

Printer Friendly Version

The Southeast Corner of the Temple

Further evidence that the Herodian Temple cannot be identified with the Moriah Platform concerns the famous pinnacle of the Temple. In his works, Josephus provides the height of the Temple’s southeastern corner as measured to its foundations in the Kidron Valley below it.

Earlier in our study we noted how the eastern wall of Solomon’s Temple mount remained as the eastern wall of all succeeding Temples.

Now, you know that all of us believe because of what we have in Josephus and in the Gospels that the eastern wall of the Temple Mount was common to the two Temple Mounts. In other words, if this is the eastern wall, this is the Golden Gate. The eastern wall is common to the two. – Dr. Dan Bahat, 1995, The Coming Temple, Presentation 2, 36 minutes and 50 seconds, Koinonia House, http://store.khouse.org/...

The addition of Herod the Great, onto the earlier Temple Mount to which the laws of purity pertain, the additions were from south, west, and north. Whereas the east was still original, ancient Temple Mount, was retaining wall, was still there. This is clear to us and I’ll tell you why. First of all, as you know from the Gospels, the name of the eastern portico is the portico of Solomon. Why is it called the portico of Solomon? Because during the second Temple period, everything, especially for the later part, everything which was, which seemed to be very old, was believed to be made still by King Solomon. – Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, 35 minutes and 41 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

First of all, as you know from the Gospels, the name of the eastern portico is the portico of Solomon. Why is it called the portico of Solomon? Because during the second Temple period, everything, especially for the later part, everything which was, which seemed to be very old, was believed to be made still by King Solomon. You see, that was a principle. – Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, 35 minutes and 41 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

And they asked him to give them money to rebuild the eastern portico of the Temple because that one was already derelict because of its old age. Which means, we see, that the eastern portico was really the oldest one. Because otherwise, if it was built, had it been from the same age as all the others, they wouldn’t have mentioned this one is old, or they’d say it is as old as all the others, or they’d not mention at all its old age. And therefore, we can learn that the eastern side, at least part of it, was the ancient Temple Mount, belongs still to the ancient Temple Mount. Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, 36 minutes and 52 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

However, the fact that the eastern wall of all the Temples remained from Solomon’s Temple was first established from Josephus. In his accounts, Josephus explains that the southeastern corner of the Temple was exceedingly high. The reason he provides for this extreme elevation was that the base of the eastern wall was founded directly in the floor of the Kidron Valley itself.

1. NOW this temple, as I have already said, was built upon a strong hill. At first the plain at the top was hardly sufficient for the holy house and the altar, for the ground about it was very uneven, and like a precipice; but when king Solomon, who was the person that built the temple, had built a wall to it on its east side, there was then added one cloister founded on a bank cast up for it, and on the other parts the holy house stood naked. – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 5, Chapter 5, Paragraph 1

7. And now it was that 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 labors about the temple; and while they were unwilling to keep by them 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 these treasures upon them; for if any one of them did but labor 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, (27) who first of all built the entire temple. – Josephus, Antiquities, Book 20, Chapter 9

2. But the next day the Romans burnt down the northern cloister entirely, as far as the east cloister, whose common angle joined to the valley that was called Cedron, and was built over it; on which account the depth was frightful. And this was the state of the temple at that time. – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 6, Chapter 3, Paragraph 2

5. …but the fourth front of the temple, which was southward, had indeed itself gates in its middle, as also it had the royal cloisters, with three walks, which reached in length from the east valley unto that on the west, for it was impossible it should reach any farther: and this cloister deserves to be mentioned better than any other under the sun; for while the valley was very deep, and its bottom could not be seen, if you looked from above into the depth, this further vastly high elevation of the cloister stood upon that height, insomuch that if any one looked down from the top of the battlements, or down both those altitudes, he would be giddy, while his sight could not reach to such an immense depth. – Josephus, Antiquities, Book 15, Chapter 10

As Josephus records, Solomon had to place the foundations of this eastern wall far beneath the surface of the Kidron Valley in order to support the large structure that he would be built on top of them.

2. Now, therefore, the king laid the foundations of the temple very deep in the ground, and the materials were strong stones, and such as would resist the force of time; these were to unite themselves with the earth, and become a basis and a sure foundation for that superstructure which was to be erected over it; they were to be so strong, in order to sustain with ease those vast superstructures and precious ornaments, whose own weight was to be not less than the weight of those other high and heavy buildings which the king designed to be very ornamental and magnificent. – Josephus, Antiquities, Book 8, Chapter 3

3. So Herod…also encompassed the entire temple with very large cloisters, contriving them to be in a due proportion thereto; and he laid out larger sums of money upon them than had been done before him, till it seemed that no one else had so greatly adorned the temple as he had done. There was a large wall to both the cloisters, which wall was itself the most prodigious work that was ever heard of by man. The hill was a rocky ascent, that declined by degrees towards the east parts of the city, till it came to an elevated level. This hill it was which Solomon, who was the first of our kings, by Divine revelation, encompassed with a wall; it was of excellent workmanship upwards, and round the top of it. He also built a wall below, beginning at the bottom, which was encompassed by a deep valley; and at the south side he laid rocks together, and bound them one to another with lead, and included some of the inner parts, till it proceeded to a great height, and till both the largeness of the square edifice and its altitude were immense, and till the vastness of the stones in the front were plainly visible on the outside, yet so that the inward parts were fastened together with iron, and preserved the joints immovable for all future times. When this work [for the foundation] was done in this manner, and joined together as part of the hill itself to the very top of it, he wrought it all into one outward surface, and filled up the hollow places which were about the wall, and made it a level on the external upper surface, and a smooth level also. – Josephus, Antiquities, Book 15, Chapter 10

According to Josephus the foundations of the eastern wall of the Temple mount were deep within the floor of the Kidron Valley. Josephus indicates that the height of this eastern wall from the valley floor was 300 cubits (450 feet, 137 meters).

1. The lowest part of this was erected to the height of three hundred cubits, and in some places more; yet did not the entire depth of the foundations appear, for they brought earth, and filled up the valleys, – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 5, Chapter 5, Paragraph 1

In its deepest sections, however, Josephus records the height of Solomon’s eastern wall to be 400 cubits (600 feet, 182 meters). This measure, however, may include the subterranean foundations which Solomon sank deep below the ground of the valley floor.

9. Solomon made all these things for the honor of God, with great variety and magnificence, sparing no cost, but using all possible liberality in adorning the temple; and these things he dedicated to the treasures of God. He also placed a partition round about the temple, which in our tongue we call Gison, but it is called Thrigcos by the Greeks, and he raised it up to the height of three cubits; and it was for the exclusion of the multitude from coming into the temple, and showing that it was a place that was free and open only for the priests. He also built beyond this court a temple, whose figure was that of a quadrangle, and erected for it great and broad cloisters; this was entered into by very high gates, each of which had its front exposed to one of the [four] winds, and were shut by golden doors. Into this temple all the people entered that were distinguished from the rest by being pure and observant of the laws. But he made that temple which was beyond this a wonderful one indeed, and such as exceeds all description in words; nay, if I may so say, is hardly believed upon sight; for when he had filled up great valleys with earth, which, on account of their immense depth, could not be looked on, when you bended down to see them, without pain, and had elevated the ground four hundred cubits, he made it to be on a level with the top of the mountain, on which the temple was built, and by this means the outmost temple, which was exposed to the air, was even with the temple itself. (13) He encompassed this also with a building of a double row of cloisters, which stood on high upon pillars of native stone, while the roofs were of cedar, and were polished in a manner proper for such high roofs; but he made all the doors of this temple of silver. – Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 8, Chapter 3

An exact measurement of the eastern wall from the valley floor may elude us. However, we can see from Josephus’ account that it was a very great height. And we must recognize that this height was, in part, due to the fact that the wall was directly above the Kidron Valley itself. A conservative estimate based on Josephus’ own number and accounting for sub-surface foundations might be somewhere between 350-450 feet (106-137 meters).

The New Testament concurs with Josephus’ account and refers to this southeastern corner of the Temple as Solomon’s Porch and “the pinnacle.” Such terms confirm both its construction by Solomon and its tremendous height.

John 10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon’s porch.

Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s porch…

Matthew 4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

Luke 4:9 And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:

These parallels between the New Testament and Josephus’ descriptions are recognized by scholars today.

The basic sources are first of all, Josephus Flavius, which is extremely important. And to Josephus Flavius, I will add, not as an independent source, I will add the Gospels and Acts because there are so many small details, which are so important to the Temple Mount like, and you will see how essential it is, Solomon’s portico, the court of the Gentiles, the pinnacle, and so many other things, which are mentioned only in the Gospels or in Acts, of the Beautiful Gate, for example, which is also important. All those show up only in the Gospels, but when you take the Gospels you’ll see that all the descriptions of the Gospels go very well along with Josephus Flavius. It is identical. I will say, in this respect, the Gospels, of course, add more detail. 10:08 Dan Bahat, The Traditional Location of the Temples, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

We can compare these historic descriptions of the eastern wall of the Temple with the eastern wall of the Moriah Platform. The details do not match. The eastern wall of the Moriah Platform is not within the Kidron Valley itself as Josephus states. Instead, it is founded over half way up the eastern slope of the Moriah ridge.

Now, it is true that the Kidron Valley has been filled in by debris over the last 20 centuries so it is not as deep as it may have been 2,000 years ago. However, the height of the Moriah Platform is also not necessarily the same as it was in the Herodian period. In fact, only the first seven courses of above-ground stone are Herodian.

Western Wall – At the Western Wall Plaza, the total height of the Wall from its foundation is estimated at 105 feet (32 m), with the exposed section standing approximately 62 feet (19 m) high. – wikipedia.org

Western Wall – The Wall consists of 45 stone courses, 28 of them above ground and 17 underground.^[8] The first seven visible layers are from the Herodian period. – wikipedia.org

Western Wall – Just over half the wall, including its 17 courses located below street level, dates from the end of the Second Temple period, being constructed around 19 BCE by Herod the Great. The remaining layers were added from the 7th century onwards. – wikipedia.org

These facts mean that level of the Herodian platform may have been noticeably lower than the current platform (perhaps as much as 50 feet (15 meters). So, both the Kidron Valley and the Herodian Platform were not necessarily at lower elevations that we see today. The relative differences between today’s levels and the Herodian levels can only be speculated. However, the eastern wall of the Moriah Platform is clearly not founded in the floor of the Kidron Valley. For this reason the Moriah Platform does not fit the historical descriptions of the southeastern corner of the Temple. This indicates that the Moriah Platform should not be identified as the Temple mount. If the Moriah Platform is not the Temple Mount, then the Temple would have to be located to its south.

The Temple was Destroyed, the Moriah Platform Survived

As Josephus and other early eyewitnesses testify the Temple’s walls were thrown down to their foundations. Josephus states that Jerusalem was so thoroughly destroyed that no one would have even known there had been a city there.

Josephus also provides the account of Eleazar ben Simon, leader of the Jewish rebellion against Rome.

Eleazar ben Simon – Eleazar ben Simon was a Zealot leader during the First Jewish-Roman War who fought against the armies of Cestius Gallus, Vespasian, and Titus Flavius. From the onset of the war in 66 A.D. until the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D., he fought vehemently against the Roman garrisons in Judea and against his fellow Jewish political opponents in order to establish an independent Jewish state at Jerusalem. – wikipedia.org

Josephus and Eleazar were both eyewitnesses to the Roman destruction of the city and the Temple. They report that not only was Jerusalem itself demolished to its very foundations, but the foundations of the Temple too were dug up. In the quote below, Josephus records the words of Eleazar regarding the utter removal of even the foundations of the city.

7. This was Eleazar's speech to them…And where is now that great city, the metropolis of the Jewish nation, which vas fortified by so many walls round about, which had so many fortresses and large towers to defend it, which could hardly contain the instruments prepared for the war, and which had so many ten thousands of men to fight for it? Where is this city that was believed to have God himself inhabiting therein? It is now demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing but that monument of it preserved, I mean the camp of those that hath destroyed it, which still dwells upon its ruins; some unfortunate old men also lie upon the ashes of the temple, and a few women are there preserved alive by the enemy, for our bitter shame and reproach. Now who is there that revolves these things in his mind, and yet is able to bear the sight of the sun, though he might live out of danger? Who is there so much his country's enemy, or so unmanly, and so desirous of living, as not to repent that he is still alive? And I cannot but wish that we had all died before we had seen that holy city demolished by the hands of our enemies, or the foundations of our holy temple dug up after so profane a manner. – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 7, Chapter 8, Paragraph 7

In his book A Treasury of Jewish Folklore, Nathan Ausubel explains that sixty years after the destruction of 70 AD, the Temple was only a heap of stones where jackals howled.

Desolate lay Zion, in ruins moldering Jerusalem; the Temple was but a heap of stones. Where once stood the Sanctuary now grew weeds and jackals howled in the Temple court, where once David the Psalmist and his vast choir of Levites plucked the harp strings and raised their voices in songs of praise to the Eternal. Sixty years had passed since Titus the Roman sacked the Temple and led the Jewish captives in triumph to Rome. There were now few [Jewish people] alive who could remember the beauty of the Temple. – Nathan Ausubel, A Treasury of Jewish Folklore (Crown Publishers: NY, 1978), pp.233-4.

Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai also spoke of the the ruin of the Temple within just a few decades of its destruction.

Yochanan ben Zakai - Yochanan ben Zakai (c. 30 CE - 90 CE), also known as Johanan B. Zakkai was one of the tannaim, an important Jewish sage in the era of the Second Temple, and a primary contributor to the core text of Judaism, the Mishnah. – wikipedia.org

Once again Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai was coming forth from Jerusalem [at the very end of the war], Rabbi Joshua followed after him and beheld the Temple in ruins. ‘Woe unto us!’ Rabbi Joshua cried, ‘that this, the place where the iniquities of Israel were atoned for, is laid waste’. – Aboth de Rabbi Nathan, ed. Salomon Schechter, Vienna 1887, version A (=ARNA ch.4:5, p. 21. [Judah Goldin: The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan, in Yale Judaica Series, vol. X (New Haven 1955), p. 34]).

Another Jewish source written shortly after the Temple was destroyed is Second Baruch. Like, Josephus and Eleazar, Second Baruch reports that the Temple’s walls were overthrown.

2 Baruch – 2 Baruch is a Jewish pseudepigraphical text thought to have been written in the late first century CE or early second century CE, after the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE. – wikipedia.org

I heard this angel saying to the angels who held the torches: ‘Now destroy the walls [of the Temple and Jerusalem] and overthrow them to their foundations so that the enemies [the Romans] do not boast and say, ‘We have overthrown the wall of Zion and we have burnt down the place of the mighty God.’” – Second Baruch, 6:3-7:1. Note also R. Hammer, The Jerusalem Anthology, p. 89 for more information on this early historical source, quoted from Ernest L. Martin, the Temples that Jerusalem Forgot, p.26

After the Romans had finally taken control of the city and the Temple, Titus gave particular orders regarding the Temple, which had been the final holdout of the Jewish rebellion. We must note that Titus instructs the Temple be destroyed. This destruction required that all the walls of the city (except those on the western side of the city) be dug up to their foundations. The result of this demolishment of the walls and foundations was that no one could recognize from what remained that there had ever been a city there in the first place.

1. NOW as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind. (1) – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 7, Chapter 1, Paragraph 1

We do not have to wonder what it meant for the walls of the city to have been dug up to their foundations. Josephus explains that the result of this demolition was that no one could recognize that the city had formerly existed on the site. Similarly, Eleazar asks where the great city of Jerusalem was.

Likewise, Pausanias, a Greek geographer of the second century wrote about Jerusalem’s fate under the Romans.

Pausanias – Pausanias was a Greek traveller and geographer of the 2nd century AD, who lived in the times of Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius. He is famous for his Description of Greece, a lengthy work that describes ancient Greece from firsthand observations, and is a crucial link between classical literature and modern archaeology. – wikipedia.org

The City of Jerusalem, a city that the Roman king destroyed to its foundations. – Pausanias, Description of Greece, Book VII.16.

In fact, the general understanding of ancient Jews, Christians, and Roman historians was that in 70 AD, both Jerusalem and the Temple were utterly destroyed to their foundations by the Romans. A sampling of these historical reports follows.

Gregory of Nyssa and Epiphanius writing in the fourth century AD both record that Jerusalem and the Temple were totally destroyed by the Romans. Both Gregory of Nyssa and Epiphanius’ descriptions of the Temple compare with Josephus and Eleazar’s accounts of the fate of the city itself. All four men indicate that the Romans left no trace of the city’s structures.

Where then are those palaces? Where is the Temple? Where are the walls? Where are the defense of the towers? Where is the power of the Israelites? Were not they scattered in different quarters over almost the whole world? And in their overthrow the palaces also were brought to ruin. - Gregory of Nyssa, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, s.2, vol. 5 (29), p. 804.

Up to the time of the manifestation of Christ the royal palaces in Jerusalem were in all their splendor: there was their far-famed Temple,…no traces even of their Temple can be recognized, and their splendid city has been left in ruins, so that there remains to the Jews nothing of the ancient institutions; while by the command of those who rule over them the very ground of Jerusalem which they so venerated is forbidden to them. - Gregory of Nyssa, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, s.2, vol. 5 (29), p. 940

Epiphanius of Salamis – Epiphanius wrote a work of biblical antiquarianism, called, for one of its sections, On Measures and Weights. It was composed in Constantinople for a Persian priest, in 392.^[5] - wikipedia.org

It was the second year of his reign when he [Hadrian] went up to Jerusalem, the famous and much-praised city which had been destroyed by Titus the son of Vespasian. He found it utterly destroyed and God’s Holy Temple a ruin, there being nothing where the city had stood but a few dwellings and one small church…[Then] Hadrian decided to restore the city, but not the Temple. – Epiphanius, On Weights and Measures, Dindorf ed., vol IV, pp.17-18.

A short, sixth century AD account credited to Brevairius records that all that was left of the Temple in Jerusalem was a cave.

“you come to the Temple built by Solomon, but there is nothing left there apart from a single cave.” Wilkinson, Jerusalem Pilgrims Before the Crusades, p. 61.

In his book A Treasury of Jewish Folklore, Nathan Ausubel explains that sixty years after the destruction of 70 AD, the Temple was only a heap of stones.

The Christian theologian Hippolytus, writing in the early third century AD, also speaks of the Temple’s destruction by fire and its walls being cast down.

Are not these things come to pass? Are not the things announced by thee fulfilled? Is not their country, Judea, desolate? Is not the holy place burned with fire? Are not their walls cast down? – Hippolytus, Works, Part II.30, Ante-Nicene Fathers

In the same section of his work, Hippolytus quotes Isaiah 1:8’s prophecy of Jerusalem’s destruction.

The daughter of Sion shall be left as a cottage in a vineyard, and as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers. – Hippolytus, Works, II.30 Ante-Nicene Fathers

Below is the text of Isaiah 1:7-9. We can see how Hippolytus understood it’s fulfillment in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Earlier we noted that Isaiah’s reference to the “daughter of Zion” was a biblical term for the hill of the Temple. In this passage, Isaiah described the coming Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple which would desolate the Temple and put an end to the Jewish sacrifices.

Isaiah 1:1 The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. 2 Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the LORD hath spoken, I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me. 3 The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider. 4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupters: they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward. 5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. 6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment. 7 Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers. 8 And the daughter of Zion is left as a cottage in a vineyard, as a lodge in a garden of cucumbers, as a besieged city. 9 Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah. 10 Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. 11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. 12 When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? 13 Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. 14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.

Eusebius, the Christian historian of the fourth century, also had this passage from Isaiah in mind when he spoke of the state of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. We should notice that Eusebius also parallels Isaiah’s language when describing the utter destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Eusebius wrote within a century of the Mishnah’s composition. He was a custodian of the library of Pamphilus in Caesarea just 70 miles from Jerusalem. In his description, Eusebius states that the place of the Temple was as much destroyed as Sodom and Gomorrah. By this we can be certain he meant that it was totally destroyed without a trace.

Eusebius of Caesarea – Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263 – c. 339^[1]) (often called Eusebius Pamphili, "Eusebius [the friend] of Pamphilus") became the bishop of Caesarea Palaestina, the capital of Iudaea province, c 314.^[1] He is often referred to as the Father of Church History because of his work in recording the history of the early Christian church, especially Chronicle and Ecclesiastical History^[1]. – wikipedia.org

…has been left as a tent in a vineyard, as a hut in a garden of cucumbers, or as anything that is more desolate than these. And strangers devour the land before their eyes, now exacting tax and tribute, and now appropriating for themselves the land that belonged of old to the Jews. Yea, and the beauteous Temple of their mother city was laid low [it no longer stands] being cast down by alien peoples, and their cities were burned with fire, and Jerusalem became truly a besieged city. – Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, Book 1, Chapter 3, Section 64

Their ancient holy place, at any rate, and their Temple are to this day as much destroyed as Sodom. – Eusebius, Proof of the Gospel, Book 1, Chapter 1, Section 6

Eusebius also plainly states that the Temple had been leveled with the ground.

The entire Jewish people were scattered by an unseen power, their royal seat was utterly removed, and their very Temple with its holy things, were leveled with the ground.... – The Oration of Eusebius, Chapter XVII, Section 8.

…burned the truly divine sanctuary of God with fire, and profaned to the ground the Tabernacle of His name. Then they buried the miserable one with heaps of earth, that destroyed every hope of deliverance. – Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book X., 4, 58.

These historical accounts can be coupled with a comparison of the fate of the rest of Herodian Jerusalem. The result leaves little doubt that the Romans leveled the city to the ground. Its walls were overthrown and dug up to their foundations. Nothing was left. The historical sources indicate that the Temple itself suffered this same kind of destruction. Its very walls were dug up to the foundations and cast down to the ground. As we saw earlier from Josephus’ account, the Temple’s eastern wall was founded in the floor the Kidron Valley itself. Therefore, to tear the walls of the Temple down to their foundations would remove any traces of the Temple’s walls above ground. To dig up the Temple’s foundations would have required removing the entire wall above the ground as well as the support stones that had been embedded within the earth.

In addition, the New Testament records Jesus’ prophecy that the entire Temple structure would be demolished without one stone being left on another. This prophecy is recorded by three of the four gospel writers.

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple (2411): and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings (3619) of the temple (2411). 2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. 3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Mark 13:1 And as he went out of the temple 2411), one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings (3619) are here! 2 And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings (3619)? there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. 3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple (2411), Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately,

Luke 21:5 And as some spake of the temple (2411), how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said, 6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

The important thing to note is that Jesus uses the Greek word “hieron” (Strong’s number 2411) to refer to the Temple.

2411 hieron

from 2413; TDNT-3:230,349; n n

AV-temple 71; 71
1) a sacred place, temple

1a) used of the temple of Artemis at Ephesus

1b) used of the temple at Jerusalem

The temple of Jerusalem consisted of the whole of the sacred enclosure, embracing the entire aggregate of buildings, balconies, porticos, courts (that is that of the men of Israel, that of the women, and that of the priests), belonging to the temple; the latter designates the sacred edifice properly so called, consisting of two parts, the "sanctuary" or "Holy Place" (which no one except the priests was allowed to enter), and the "Holy of Holies" or "the most holy place" (which was entered only on the great day of atonement by the high priest alone). Also there were the courts where Jesus or the apostles taught or encountered adversaries, and the like, "in the temple"; also the courts of the temple, of the Gentiles, out of which Jesus drove the buyers and sellers and the money changers, court of the women.

As the definition above shows, this Greek word “hieron” is used in the New Testament to refer to the entire Temple complex, including its courts, its porches, and its walls.

Matthew 4:5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple (2411),

Matthew 21:12 And Jesus went into the temple (2411) of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple (2411), and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves,

Matthew 21:14 And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple (2411); and he healed them.

Luke 4:9 And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple (2411), and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:

John 10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple (2411) in Solomon’s porch.

Jesus does not use the alternative Greek word “naos” (Strong’s number 3485), which is used to refer to the sacred edifice of the Temple building itself (the Holy Place and Holy of Holies).

3485 naos

from a primary naio (to dwell); TDNT-4:880,625; n m

AV-temple 45, a shrine 1; 46

1) used of the temple at Jerusalem, but only of the sacred edifice (or sanctuary) itself, consisting of the Holy place and the Holy of Holies (in classical Greek it is used of the sanctuary or cell of the temple, where the image of gold was placed which is distinguished from the whole enclosure)
2) any heathen temple or shrine

3) metaph. the spiritual temple consisting of the saints of all ages joined together by and in Christ

Matthew 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple (3485) was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

Mark 15:38 And the veil of the temple (3485) was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.

Luke 1:9 According to the custom of the priest’s office, his lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple (3485) of the Lord….21 And the people waited for Zacharias, and marvelled that he tarried so long in the temple (3485). 22 And when he came out, he could not speak unto them: and they perceived that he had seen a vision in the temple (3485): for he beckoned unto them, and remained speechless.

It is clear that Jesus prophesied that the Roman destruction would not leave a single stone of the entire Temple complex on top of another. This prophesy fits very well with the historic descriptions made by Josephus, Eleazar, Second Baruch, Pausanias, Gregory of Nyssa, Epiphanius, Brevairius, Hippolytus, and Eusebius. It is important to note that the first three of these sources are early Jewish sources. Two of these are eyewitnesses. Clearly, these New Testament texts can be added to the list of Jewish eyewitness reports that the entire Temple complex was destroyed to its foundations. It is not possible that the New Testament authors would have included a prophecy from Jesus that the entire complex of the Temple would be destroyed if it was an observable fact that only the sacred edifice had been destroyed while the rest of the Temple complex still stood largely unharmed.

These historic reports from so many early Jewish and Christian sources warrant a few questions. Is the Moriah Platform a structure whose walls have been overthrown and cast down and dug up to the foundations? Is the Moriah Platform a heap of stones whose stones do not remain upon one another? Clearly not. Can the place of the Moriah Platform be found? Of course it can. Obviously then, these historic descriptions of the Temple’s utter demolition do not in any way fit with the Moriah Platform which clearly survived the Roman siege. On the contrary, thousands of massive stones remain in their courses from the ancient Herodian edifice that today is called the Moriah Platform.

Furthermore, we must recognize that no other Herodian structure survives in Jerusalem today that even comes close to the condition of preservation exhibited by Moriah Platform. Many ancient structures of importance existed in ancient Jerusalem. Some of them were very close to the Temple. Herod built a large palace. But it isn’t found today.

So, I can go back and say that the Hasmonean palace was in this angle. I don’t know exactly where. We didn’t find it. – Tuvia Sugiv, 1995, The Coming Temple, Presentation 2, Koinonia House, http://store.khouse.org/...

There were also three major tower fortifications as well as three walls constructed around the city. Again, only one of the Herodian structures remains today, the Moriah Platform.

Archeologically speaking, the Herodian layers which were discovered adjacent to the Temple Mount [the Moriah Platform] are articulated properly and we say this from pure archeological reasons. We are able to ascribe the present Temple Mount [the Moriah Platform] to Herod the Great. There is no question about it. – Dr. Dan Bahat, 1995, The Coming Temple, Presentation 2, 26:50-31:36 minutes, Koinonia House, http://store.khouse.org/...

This absence of other Herodian structures fits with the descriptions of the destruction of Jerusalem that was carried out by the Romans in 70 AD and again in 132 AD. Accounts by Josephus and others, both Jewish, Roman, and Christian describe the utter demolition of the city’s many buildings. Several of these descriptions, including two first century Jewish accounts state that no trace was found of them and that their walls were dug up to the foundations. We do not need to wonder what is meant by these descriptions. Their absence from the landscape of the city today informs us of the total nature of the Roman destruction. And yet, we have this single, magnificent, large platform built by Herod that remains.

Noting that the platform survived against the consistent witness of the historical sources that the Temple was destroyed to its foundations indicates that this structure cannot responsibility be identified with the Temple mount. The logic of suggesting otherwise is completely contrary to the united testimony of the historical record that the Temple was utterly destroyed. Likewise, is it reasonable to suppose that Titus completely leveled every structure in Jerusalem to the ground except the one building that had repeatedly been the chief flashpoint of Jewish uprisings and nationalistic fervor, not to mention the very place used as a stronghold for their last military stand in the city? Such a suggestion seems quite unsound. Instead, the fact that Titus left this Herodian platform intact is another evidence that this structure is not the Temple mount, but another prominent, ancient Herodian structure instead.

But, why did Titus leave this particular structure unharmed?

Historical evidence indicates that the platform remained as the fort of the Romans. Earlier we read Josephus’ record of Eleazar’s statement that the only thing that remained after the destruction of 70 AD was the camp of the Romans.

Eleazar ben Simon – Eleazar ben Simon was a Zealot leader during the First Jewish-Roman War> who fought against the armies of Cestius Gallus, Vespasian, and Titus Flavius. From the onset of the war in 66 A.D. until the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D., he fought vehemently against the Roman garrisons in Judea and against his fellow Jewish political opponents in order to establish an independent Jewish state at Jerusalem. – wikipedia.org

And where is now that great city, the metropolis of the Jewish nation, which vas fortified by so many walls round about, which had so many fortresses and large towers to defend it, which could hardly contain the instruments prepared for the war, and which had so many ten thousands of men to fight for it? Where is this city that was believed to have God himself inhabiting therein? It is now demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing but that monument of it preserved, I mean the camp of those that hath destroyed it, which still dwells upon its ruins; some unfortunate old men also lie upon the ashes of the temple, and a few women are there preserved alive by the enemy, for our bitter shame and reproach. Now who is there that revolves these things in his mind, and yet is able to bear the sight of the sun, though he might live out of danger? Who is there so much his country's enemy, or so unmanly, and so desirous of living, as not to repent that he is still alive? And I cannot but wish that we had all died before we had seen that holy city demolished by the hands of our enemies, or the foundations of our holy temple dug up after so profane a manner. – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 7, Chapter 8, Paragraph 7

Eleazar’s statement makes a great deal of sense. After all, the Roman tenth legion remained in Jerusalem long after the destruction of 70 AD. In fact, they were stationed in Jerusalem until the early fifth century.

Aelia Capitolina – Aelia Capitolina (Latin in full: Colonia Aelia Capitolina) was a city built by the emperor Hadrian, and occupied by a Roman colony, on the site of Jerusalem, which was still in ruins from the Great Jewish Revolt in 70 A.D. Josephus, a contemporary, reports that: “Jerusalem ... was so thoroughly razed to the ground by those that demolished it to its foundations, that nothing was left that could ever persuade visitors that it had once been a place of habitation[1] ” When Emperor Hadrian vowed to rebuild Jerusalem from the wreckage in 130 A.D., he considered reconstructing Jerusalem as a gift for the Jewish people. The Jews awaited with hope, because Hadrian was considered a moderate. But after Hadrian visited Jerusalem, he decided to build Aelia Capitolina which would be habitated by his legionaires. Hadrian also decided to never allow Jews to re-enter the city ever again….The city was without walls, protected by a light garrison of the Tenth Legion, during the Late Roman Period. The detachment at Jerusalem, which apparently encamped all over the city’s western hill, was responsible for preventing Jews from returning to the city. Roman enforcement of this prohibition continued through the fourth century. – wikipedia.org

Legio X Fretensis – Legio decima Fretensis ("Tenth legion of the sea strait") was a Roman legion levied by Augustus in 41/40 BC to fight during the period of civil war that started the dissolution of the Roman Republic. X Fretensis is recorded to exist at least until 410s….After the conclusion of the Jewish revolt, Legio X was garrisoned at Jerusalem. Their main camp was positioned on the Western Hill, located in the southern half of the old city, now leveled of all former buildings. The camp of the Tenth was built using the surviving portions of the walls of Herod the Great's palace, demolished by order of Titus. The camp was at the end of the cardo maximus of Aelia Capitolina.^[1] At the time, Legio X was the sole legion assigned to maintain the peace in Iudaea, and was directly under the command of the governor of the province, who was also legatus of the legion.[2]… In 193, the legion supported Pescennius Niger against Septimius Severus, and was possibly involved in a local struggle between Jews and Samaritans. The legion was still in Jerusalem at the time of Caracalla or Elagabalus. - http://en.wikipedia.org/...

Aelia Capitolina – The city was without walls, protected by a light garrison of the Tenth Legion, during the Late Roman Period. The detachment at Jerusalem, which apparently encamped all over the city’s western hill, was responsible for preventing Jews from returning to the city. – wikipedia.org

As the quotes above attest, the camp of the Tenth Legion is supposed to have been located on the southern portion of the western hill. However, this is merely an assumption. As even the first above quote affirms there is no archeological evidence that any Roman buildings existed in that area.

It has often been suggested that the Tenth Legion's camp in Jerusalem was confined to the southwestern part of what is now known as the Old City, that is, to the modern Armenian Quarter and to the area of David's Citadel, just south of the Jaffa Gate. This is really quite a small area - about 1,300 feet by 800 feet. The assumption has been that a typical Roman military camp was founded here, protected by a wall enclosing the rectangular plan and divided by two main intersecting streets. This theory cannot be proved. The archeological evidence simply does not support this hypothetical reconstruction of the Roman military camp. - Hillel Geva and Hanan Eschel, Biblical Archeological Review, Nov./Dec., 1997, p.38

Because of the absence of archaeological evidence, it seems to us that not only was the Tenth Legion's camp not located on the southwestern hill of Jerusalem, as most scholars argue, but this hill was very sparsely populated during the late Roman period and perhaps no part of Aelia Capitolina at all at that time. - Doron Bar, Palestinian Exploration Fund Quarterly, January-June, 1998, p.87

In the 1970's, I excavated in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City with the later Professor Nahman Avigad. In site after site, the same stratigraphic picture appeared. Over the destruction layer marking the Roman conquest of the Upper City in 70 C.E., we consistently identified a construction of the Byzantine period (fourth to seventh centuries C.E.) - with nothing in between....Even more surprising, we did not uncover any other significant artifacts typical of Roman military camps (such as sepulchres or Latin inscriptions) - only a few coins and a few baskets of shards. The conclusion cannot be avoided: The Roman stratum is absent in most of the excavated areas! - Dr. David Jacobson, Biblical Archeological Review, July/August 1999, p.38

So, where are the remains of the Roman military camp? Perhaps elsewhere on the western hill? The evidence is similar wherever excavations have been conducted on the western hill, whether in the Armenian Quarter or farther south on Mt. Zion. What about the wall that is assumed to have enclosed the Roman military camp? Excavations have failed to uncover any sign of such a wall from the Roman period. On the contrary, excavations along the remains of the so-called First Wall...show that it was not used by the Romans and that no new wall was built here by the Roman army. - Hillel Geva and Hanan Eschel, Biblical Archeological Review, Nov./Dec., 1997, p.38

So, we know that the Roman Tenth Legion remained in Jerusalem until the early fifth century. And after the second Jewish revolt in 132 AD, Hadrian even constructed a new city for his legionaires to replace the twice-destroyed city of Jerusalem.

Aelia Capitolina – Aelia Capitolina (Latin in full: Colonia Aelia Capitolina) was a city built by the emperor Hadrian, and occupied by a Roman colony, on the site of Jerusalem, which was still in ruins from the Great Jewish Revolt in 70 A.D.…after Hadrian visited Jerusalem, he decided to build Aelia Capitolina which would be habitated by his legionaires. – wikipedia.org

Hadrian – In 130, Hadrian visited the ruins of Jerusalem, in Judaea, left after the First Roman-Jewish War of 66–73. He rebuilt the city, renaming it Aelia Capitolina after himself and Jupiter Capitolinus, the chief Roman deity. – wikipedia.org

But where was the camp of the Tenth Legion for whom Hadrian constructed his new Roman city? There is no archeological evidence of a Roman military camp on the western hill. And there is no evidence of the place of Aelia Capitolina. So, where did the Tenth Legion camp in Jerusalem after the city and the Temple were destroyed in 70 AD?

Tuvia Sagiv offers a suggestion based on correlations between the temple Hadrian built at Baalbek, Lebanon and the Moriah Platform.

After the Six Days Wars, the archeologists came to Jerusalem and tried to find where is Aelia Capitolina. And they didn’t find it till now. The Cardo, I hope you have seen it is from a later time, the Byzantine period. 50:21 So, where is Aelia Capitolina? There is no evidence. Only some coins. But the answer is very simple. This is Aelia Capitolina. This is the terminus of the holy place of Aelia Capitolina. And all the problem is solved immediately….and build this wonderful court which is in the style of the second century and its walls is like Baalbek. And this is Aelia Capitolina. – Tuvia Sagiv, The Southern Location of the Temples, 50 minutes and 2 seconds, http://www.templemount.org/lectures.html

Sagiv is identifying the one building from the Herodian Period that survived the Roman war. It is this large trapezoidal structure with high walls that we today call the Moriah Platform. This is the only structure which remains intact from Herodian times. And Sagiv believes that the Moriah Platform was the main location of Aelia Capitolina which Hadrian built as a city for the Tenth Legion. And why not? After all, Josephus himself stated that Antonia, the Roman fortress and legionary home of Jerusalem was very much a city of its own.

8. Now as to the tower of Antonia, it was situated at the corner of two cloisters of the court of the temple; of that on the west, and that on the north; it was erected upon a rock of fifty cubits in height, and was on a great precipice; it was the work of king Herod, wherein he demonstrated his natural magnanimity. In the first place, the rock itself was covered over with smooth pieces of stone, from its foundation, both for ornament, and that any one who would either try to get up or to go down it might not be able to hold his feet upon it. Next to this, and before you come to the edifice of the tower itself, there was a wall three cubits high; but within that wall all the space of the tower of Antonia itself was built upon, to the height of forty cubits. The inward parts had the largeness and form of a palace, it being parted into all kinds of rooms and other conveniences, such as courts, and places for bathing, and broad spaces for camps; insomuch that, by having all conveniences that cities wanted, it might seem to be composed of several cities, but by its magnificence it seemed a palace. And as the entire structure resembled that of a tower, it contained also four other distinct towers at its four corners; whereof the others were but fifty cubits high; whereas that which lay upon the southeast corner was seventy cubits high, that from thence the whole temple might be viewed; but on the corner where it joined to the two cloisters of the temple, it had passages down to them both, through which the guard (for there always lay in this tower a Roman legion) went several ways among the cloisters, with their arms, on the Jewish festivals, in order to watch the people, that they might not there attempt to make any innovations; for the temple was a fortress that guarded the city, as was the tower of Antonia a guard to the temple; and in that tower were the guards of those three (14). There was also a peculiar fortress belonging to the upper city, which was Herod's palace; but for the hill Bezetha, it was divided from the tower Antonia, as we have already told you; and as that hill on which the tower of Antonia stood was the highest of these three, so did it adjoin to the new city, and was the only place that hindered the sight of the temple on the north. And this shall suffice at present to have spoken about the city and the walls about it, because I have proposed to myself to make a more accurate description of it elsewhere. – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 5, Chapter 5, Paragraph 8

Sagiv’s conclusion is corroborated by Eleazar the commander of the Jewish revolutionaries. As we saw earlier, Eleazar stated that all the Romans left of Jerusalem was their own camp, which Eleazar called a monument. Clearly, Aelia Capitolina, built to be the city of the Tenth Legion for three centuries, was Hadrian’s monument of his conquest of the Jews.

The conclusion that the Moriah Platform is the remains of the Roman fortress Antonia is not only historically validated but it is also quite reasonable. For why would a Roman legion camp in the open or build an entirely new or makeshift fort (of which we can find no trace whatsoever) while just to the east stood a veritable stone fortress which was all that remained of the former city? Likewise, would the Romans destroy their own fort only to leave their troops in the city without one? Clearly, both historical reports and sound reasoning indicate that the Moriah Platform survived the Roman destruction because it was the camp of the Roman legion both before and after the war. Hadrian banned the Jews and stationed his troops at the former Roman fortress of Antonia. This fits very well with Josephus’ statement that Antonia Fortress was the camp of the Roman legions prior to the Jewish Revolt of 70 AD. It makes sense then that Antonia remained as the camp of the Romans after the Jewish Revolt of 132 AD as well.

8. Now as to the tower of Antonia,…it had passages down to them both, through which the guard (for there always lay in this tower a Roman legion) went several ways among the cloisters, with their arms, on the Jewish festivals, in order to watch the people, that they might not there attempt to make any innovations; for the temple was a fortress that guarded the city, as was the tower of Antonia a guard to the temple; – Josephus, Wars of the Jews, Book 5, Chapter 5, Paragraph 8

In light of these facts, there is can be little historical rationale for objecting to the conclusion that the Moriah Platform is the remains of the Roman fortress of Antonia. It is certainly not the remains of the Jewish Temple, because the entire Temple and its walls were utterly demolished. Since the Moriah Plaform is the Antonia Fortress, the location of the Temple must be sought south of this Platform nearer the area of Davidic Jerusalem.