Temple?

[outhouse]

Outhouse wrote:

"Utterly retarded. Herods temple has 100% historicity."

And:

"Now bring me some credible sources."

Yes, Herod (re)built the second Temple and the area around it, of course, but according to Josephus (summarized by Goldberg here: http://josephus.org/FlJosephus2/warChronology7Fall.html), "Titus orders the whole city and Temple to be razed to the ground, leaving only the tallest towers and a small portion of the wall on the west. The Xth legion is left to garrison Jerusalem" (War 7 1-4).

There are other reasons Sagiv gives for seeing the Temple Mount being built or expanded on by Hadrian and I was not able to go into them in my earlier post. When I'm not at work I'm limited to two hours of internet time at the library because I don't own a computer (and never have). And I was in a bad mood yesterday because I found out that one of my hearing aids can't be fixed and I have to get a new one (which will set me back almost $1500 and I presently have fifty dollars in my wallet). And I also haven't thought about this issue in about 15 years, but I'm open to reinvestigating it (or any other issue), as much as time allows.

The reason you were wrong, is there are still blocks on the ground from Herods original temple mount, and the original walls still in tact. From its destruction in 70.

The temple mount in place today is Herods, 100%. Sagiv does not even tell you he rebuild the whole mount, he just added to it

[John2]

Sagiv also points out a discrepancy between the measurements of the Temple Mount given by Josephus and the Mishnah and what we see today:

According to the Mishnah, the measurements of the area were 500 by 500 cubits, which is approximately 220 meters by 220 meters, or 50 dunams. According to Josephus, the size of the Temple Mount was "Ris by Ris," which is approximately 90 meters by 190 meters, or 40 dunams.

Despite those modest sizes appearing in the literature sources, the measurements of the Moriah Area visible today are approximately 500 meters by 300 meters, or about 150 dunams. The size of the present Moriah Area is three or more times larger then the size of the Temple Mount described in the ancient sources. In order to settle this imbalance, most researchers have previously explained that the Temple Mount described in the sources referred to the "Holy (sanctified area) Temple Mount" and the "Moriah Area" was an extension built by Herod. However, this claim does not withstand the test of the witness of Josephus. According to him, the size of the Temple Mount built by Herod, was only "Ris by Ris" in size.

Josephus described the royal portico which was on the Southern end of the Temple Mount square. According to his description, the length of the portico was one "ris," which is about 190 meters. He said that the portico continued from one side of the valley until the other side of the valley. Therefore, (he meant), from the Kotel (Tyropean or Cheesemaker's) Valley to the Kidron Valley. Today, the length of the southern wall is about 300 meters. It is about sixty percent longer then that described in the sources ... It must be noted that the descriptions of the two sources, the Mishnah and Josephus, are similar. According to both, the area was square, and its size 200 meters by 200 meters, with only deviations of ten percent. The Moriah Area visible today does not match the literary descriptions, either in form or size.

[John2]

Also that:

As stated above, the Moriah Area is approximately 500 meters by 300 meters which is about 150 dunams. If the area of the Israel Pool, which was an integral part of the area, is also included, the size of the area reaches approximately 200 dunams.

An examination of temple areas throughout the Roman Empire shows that the Moriah Area was the largest area ever built during the Roman Period. In the first century before the Common Era, Herod's era, the size of Roman temple areas ranged from two to twelve dunams. For example, The Augustus Temple Area in Shomron built by Herod was seven dunams in size. The Hercules Temple Area in Tivoli, Italy, was seven dunams. The Augustus Forum in Rome was ten dunams. The Julius Caesar Forum in Rome was 12 dunams. The Ostia Temple Area was 15 dunams. Clearly, the Temple Mount - as described in the literary sources - did not exceed 60 dunams in size, but was still a relatively large area for the first century before the Common Era.

In the second century of the Common Era, the Roman Empire was strengthened, its borders were settled and vast resources were directed toward the building of monumental public structures. The areas occupied by Roman temples were expanded and often varied in size from 40 to 150 dunams. For example, the Forum of the Trajan in Rome was 42 dunams. The Jupiter Temple Area in Baalbek in Lebanon was 52 dunams. The Bal Temple in Palmyra, Syria was 40 dunams. The Artemis Temple Area in Gerasa, Jordan was 40 dunams. The Jupiter Temple Area in Damascus was 125 dunams.

In light of the sizes of temple areas throughout the Roman Empire it can be stated that the Moriah Area in Jerusalem is comparable in terms of size to the temple areas built during the Second Century of the Common Era and is not comparable to those areas built in the First Century before the Common Era.

[outhouse]

You are just parroting Sagiv.

He is not considered credible here, and his opinion has never accepted by anyone.


But thanks for playing. He is a quack

[outhouse]

This is an example of what is credible.


In around 19 BCE, Herod the Great extended the Mount's natural plateau by enclosing the area with four massive retaining walls and filling the voids. This artificial expansion resulted in a large flat expanse which today forms the eastern section of the Old City of Jerusalem. The trapezium shaped platform measures 488 m along the west, 470 m along the east, 315 m along the north and 280 m along the south, giving a total area of approximately 150,000 m2 (37 acres).

[outhouse]

This is credible from a credible scholar.

http://orion.mscc.huji.ac.il/symposiums ... man99.html

The measurements given by Josephus, namely that each side of the Temple enclosure was the length of a stade, which is between 585 and 660 feet, seems to indicate a dimension which agrees neither with that of the Mishnah nor with that of the present-day Temple Mount enclosure which may have been expanded somewhat during the Islamic period.

[Kris]

I am excited that people are interested in this topic--but I am trying to understand the arguments here-- it seems people have different ideas where the second temple was located. I thought it was on the Temple Mount where the Done of the Rock is located. I read up on Sagiv and he seems kind if quacky, with little support. Wouldn't this be a big issue with building the temple-- finding the correct location? And if is on the Temple Mount, wouldn't the Islamic countries have a fit-- even if Israel didn't try to remove their shrines, but build along side?

[outhouse]

-- it seems people have different ideas where the second temple was located.

Real scholars study the temple scrolls and Josephus measurements. Not debating its actual location.

Its current location has 100% historicity.

I read up on Sagiv and he seems kind if quacky, with little support.

Exactly.

[Kris]

And just to clarify-- Josephus had it in the Temple Mount, correct? Where this Islamic shrines currently stand?

[John2]

Outhouse,

As I said, I haven't thought about this issue in 15 years and am open to revisiting it.

I read the article you linked to and I don't see how it applies to this discussion. Schiffman compares Josephus' description of the Temple with the description of the idealized Temple in the Temple Scroll and he concludes that:

There is absolutely no chance that Josephus used the Temple Scroll or the architectural plan included in it as a source.

The ideals of the architect of that plan for a gargantuan, redesigned Temple were never realized, even when Herod's architects rebuilt the Temple.

The Herodian architects made no use at all of the Temple Scroll.

Josephus' plan for the Solomonic Temple resulted from biblical interpretation with only minimal influence from the existing Temple of his day.

The description of the Herodian Temple by Josephus derived from direct information/observation of its architecture. Unlike the description of the Temple Scroll, Josephus' accounts represented reality, not utopia. Those of the Temple Scroll represented utopia, not reality.

Also, this statement you cited appears to be in line with what Sagiv is saying.

The measurements given by Josephus, namely that each side of the Temple enclosure was the length of a stade, which is between 585 and 660 feet, seems to indicate a dimension which agrees neither with that of the Mishnah nor with that of the present-day Temple Mount enclosure which may have been expanded somewhat during the Islamic period.

In other words, the Temple Mount enclosure we see today is larger than the one that Josephus and the Mishnah describe (whether it was expanded by Hadrian or during the Islamic period or whenever).

As for parroting Sagiv, I have to do all of my internet use on my days off with the two hours that the library gives me, so I haven't had enough time to expand on what Sagiv is saying (on top of the emailing and research I need to do on other issues), but in any event you haven't answered what I've cited to my satisfaction.

As for Sagiv's credentials, I like to focus on the merits of an idea, and the article you linked to (and the quote you gave from it) actually to lends support to Sagiv's idea by saying that the Temple Mount is larger today than described in the ancient sources.

I also mentioned Goldberg's summary of Josephus, in which he notes that, "Titus orders the whole city and Temple to be razed to the ground, leaving only the tallest towers and a small portion of the wall on the west," and here is Josephus' description in War 7.1.1.

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

http://earlyjewishwritings.com/text/josephus/war7.html