forums

Off-Topic Archeological Finds

Advertisement
RVACane said:
www.jpost.com

Ancient seal discovered in Temple Mount soil | The Jerusalem Post

Based on the writing style, the sealing dates to the late First Temple period, approximately the late-7th to early-6th century BCE.
www.jpost.com www.jpost.com
Click to expand...

I note that it stipulates that this was found in Temple Mount SOIL. Which was cast off into the valley.

They can't say it came FROM the so-called Temple Mount - because the so-called Temple Mount is above and outside the proper boundaries of The City of David.

The Pentateuch and the other Books we call the Old Testament - in numerous scriptures state clearly that the Temple was located in the City of David - coincidentally where the Giza Spring was against - which provided all the water necessary to take care of the mass of blood from animal sacrifices.

There's NO source of water on the "Temple Mount." Never was, and later water was brought in by a Roman Aquaduct.

Interesting this verification of what period by name it comes from - but that doesn't mean the Temple was any closer than 600' from the Roman fort wall which was laid out in size equal to the Roman custom for a legion.

I wonder how these people can tout the Temple Mount as being the former location of the First, and then the Second Temple - when their own texts many times say likewise - as does other historians who even was there when the Second Temple was destroyed - by secular historians.

Josephus himself was a witness to the assault on Jerusalem, the destruction of the Temple, and he said that upon completion of the Temple's destruction - had you not known where it was previously - you'd never guess it was once there.

I mean - he said it was so thoroughly destroyed, nothing was left in place or part. He made it clear that the "Wailing Wall" didn't exist. It was assumed and named by a people that had been cast out of the area for centuries - and they seem to NEED some physical connection - even if it's false.

I never understood that. Never will.

Julius Caesar never slept in my house here in NW Florida. But maybe I should put a sign out - and there would be some foolish enough to ignore all history, all geography, all witness testimony - and believe it.
 
UMFarArcher said:
I note that it stipulates that this was found in Temple Mount SOIL. Which was cast off into the valley.

They can't say it came FROM the so-called Temple Mount - because the so-called Temple Mount is above and outside the proper boundaries of The City of David.

The Pentateuch and the other Books we call the Old Testament - in numerous scriptures state clearly that the Temple was located in the City of David - coincidentally where the Giza Spring was against - which provided all the water necessary to take care of the mass of blood from animal sacrifices.

There's NO source of water on the "Temple Mount." Never was, and later water was brought in by a Roman Aquaduct.

Interesting this verification of what period by name it comes from - but that doesn't mean the Temple was any closer than 600' from the Roman fort wall which was laid out in size equal to the Roman custom for a legion.

I wonder how these people can tout the Temple Mount as being the former location of the First, and then the Second Temple - when their own texts many times say likewise - as does other historians who even was there when the Second Temple was destroyed - by secular historians.

Josephus himself was a witness to the assault on Jerusalem, the destruction of the Temple, and he said that upon completion of the Temple's destruction - had you not known where it was previously - you'd never guess it was once there.

I mean - he said it was so thoroughly destroyed, nothing was left in place or part. He made it clear that the "Wailing Wall" didn't exist. It was assumed and named by a people that had been cast out of the area for centuries - and they seem to NEED some physical connection - even if it's false.

I never understood that. Never will.

Julius Caesar never slept in my house here in NW Florida. But maybe I should put a sign out - and there would be some foolish enough to ignore all history, all geography, all witness testimony - and believe it.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I’ve seen you say this on more than one occasion and it’s clearly a topic of interest to you but with the amount of things uncovered at the wall, to say it without acrimony, my guess is that there’s a flip side to what you are saying. I don’t know what’s what either way and I don’t care what people call it, Israel needs to keep control over a united Jerusalem that includes the location of the gold domed Al Aqsa mosque - a place I have actually been to🕌
 
RVACane said:
I don’t know. I’ve seen you say this on more than one occasion and it’s clearly a topic of interest to you but with the amount of things uncovered at the wall, to say it without acrimony, my guess is that there’s a flip side to what you are saying. I don’t know what’s what either way and I don’t care what people call it, Israel needs to keep control over a united Jerusalem that includes the location of the gold domed Al Aqsa mosque - a place I have actually been to🕌
Click to expand...

I recall a US soldier finding Roman gold coins - in the dirt in Vietnam. Using this logic - there must have been a Roman Bank in the jungle in Vietnam.

There was a small stone carving of the Ten Commandments in Arizona - looking to be hundreds of years old. So which part of Israel would Arizona be? Or which tribe of Israel settled in Arizona?

Things found in situ - they're more believable than something found on or within the perimeter of a former Roman Legion, occupied for hundreds of years - and visited by many merchants selling their wares to the Roman soldiers. How many footsteps did thousands of men put onto that ground - and no one dropped anything? Lost anything?

Then again, I've seen clearly that some things "found" by archaeologists were just a bit too convenient. 600' is not very far away - but it's a good distance if you're talking about a building.

You're right - I've thrown this out there - hoping someone who actually believes the Temple Mount is the site of the Second Temple - and could address some of the questions I pose.

Oddly, no one has stepping in with anything that can disprove the facts that I put out. We know where the City of David is. We know it's below and outside the so-called Temple Mount. We know the Temple was in the City of David. Which is NOT ON the Temple Mount.

So why still call it "The Temple Mount?" What else did they get wrong?
 
UMFarArcher said:
I recall a US soldier finding Roman gold coins - in the dirt in Vietnam. Using this logic - there must have been a Roman Bank in the jungle in Vietnam.

There was a small stone carving of the Ten Commandments in Arizona - looking to be hundreds of years old. So which part of Israel would Arizona be? Or which tribe of Israel settled in Arizona?

Things found in situ - they're more believable than something found on or within the perimeter of a former Roman Legion, occupied for hundreds of years - and visited by many merchants selling their wares to the Roman soldiers. How many footsteps did thousands of men put onto that ground - and no one dropped anything? Lost anything?

Then again, I've seen clearly that some things "found" by archaeologists were just a bit too convenient. 600' is not very far away - but it's a good distance if you're talking about a building.

You're right - I've thrown this out there - hoping someone who actually believes the Temple Mount is the site of the Second Temple - and could address some of the questions I pose.

Oddly, no one has stepping in with anything that can disprove the facts that I put out. We know where the City of David is. We know it's below and outside the so-called Temple Mount. We know the Temple was in the City of David. Which is NOT ON the Temple Mount.

So why still call it "The Temple Mount?" What else did they get wrong?
Click to expand...
No one on here has independent knowledge on the flip side. I think your assertions are interesting and I don’t personally care where the temple was exactly from a religious or Israel supporter perspective. To me it’s all Israeli land regardless of the temple’s location.

If I knew anything of substance on the matter, I’d voice opinions, but I do not. I am certain that there are other views with their own compelling arguments as well.
 
RVACane said:
No one on here has independent knowledge on the flip side. I think your assertions are interesting and I don’t personally care where the temple was exactly from a religious or Israel supporter perspective. To me it’s all Israeli land regardless of the temple’s location.

If I knew anything of substance on the matter, I’d voice opinions, but I do not. I am certain that there are other views with their own compelling arguments as well.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the flip side part is. Those are not my assertions - I'd not do assertions.

Simple Questions - Does the Old Testament - the Torah - say several times the Temple was in the City of David? It's a simple yes or no.

Do we KNOW the borders and exactly where the City of David is?

Is the City of David and its boundaries - on the Temple Mount?

Did Josephus - witness to the Roman destruction of the area - not say that if one didn't know where the Temple was - you'd not see anything remaining?

Yet on the Temple Mount - there's supposedly the Wailing Wall - part of the Temple Complex.

How can anyone reconcile these divergent discrepancies?


Point being - after the ban for well over a thousand years - the people of Judah that came back - mistakenly assumed the Temple Mount was where the Temple stood. Because they wanted it to be - not because it violates their own testimonies in the Old Testament/Torah. Or do they not even read the Torah?

If they were wrong about that - I'm asking - what else are they mistaken about - and can't they read their own Scriptures - and believe them?

Maybe that's the kind of attitude that caused the destruction of the Temple - all lineage records being lost - even the priesthood can't be determined ever again, and certainly the Messiah that HAD to be of the seed of David - can't prove his lineage - a necessity - as all the records were lost when the Romans sacked and destroyed almost everything?

I find this interesting. I also find it interesting that the "Ten Lost Tribes of Israel" migrated from the Black Sea - north and west. I find it interesting that Josephus knew where the former Ten Tribes were.

I also find it interesting that while at a well, the Christ told the woman that he was here to save the Lost of Israel. Delivered to Judah first - and rejected - to Israel. And the Apostles, aside from Paul - were to deliver the Good News to - the former ten tribes of Israel.

I don't think many people actually read with any comprehension, as many things are spoken of are being proven as more and more discoveries are made. This chip/seal. It's a verification that the parts of the Old Testament - with names - are verified as this name just showed up. Meaning - those names weren't made up in the original texts.

Flipping through the Old Testament - it's one bad mistake after another for God's Chosen. Destruction, defeat, captivity, one after another - as they kept stumbling badly and couldn't follow the simple instructions they were given.

Now we see selective misdirection as they cant even look at the location specified in the texts. And the need for large volumes of water for the sacrifices.

I'd have not mentioned this again until I see someone is trying to connect the Temple Mount with the actual location of the Temple.

Because it's unjustified.
 
UMFarArcher said:
I'm not sure what the flip side part is. Those are not my assertions - I'd not do assertions.

Simple Questions - Does the Old Testament - the Torah - say several times the Temple was in the City of David? It's a simple yes or no.

Do we KNOW the borders and exactly where the City of David is?

Is the City of David and its boundaries - on the Temple Mount?

Did Josephus - witness to the Roman destruction of the area - not say that if one didn't know where the Temple was - you'd not see anything remaining?

Yet on the Temple Mount - there's supposedly the Wailing Wall - part of the Temple Complex.

How can anyone reconcile these divergent discrepancies?


Point being - after the ban for well over a thousand years - the people of Judah that came back - mistakenly assumed the Temple Mount was where the Temple stood. Because they wanted it to be - not because it violates their own testimonies in the Old Testament/Torah. Or do they not even read the Torah?

If they were wrong about that - I'm asking - what else are they mistaken about - and can't they read their own Scriptures - and believe them?

Maybe that's the kind of attitude that caused the destruction of the Temple - all lineage records being lost - even the priesthood can't be determined ever again, and certainly the Messiah that HAD to be of the seed of David - can't prove his lineage - a necessity - as all the records were lost when the Romans sacked and destroyed almost everything?

I find this interesting. I also find it interesting that the "Ten Lost Tribes of Israel" migrated from the Black Sea - north and west. I find it interesting that Josephus knew where the former Ten Tribes were.

I also find it interesting that while at a well, the Christ told the woman that he was here to save the Lost of Israel. Delivered to Judah first - and rejected - to Israel. And the Apostles, aside from Paul - were to deliver the Good News to - the former ten tribes of Israel.

I don't think many people actually read with any comprehension, as many things are spoken of are being proven as more and more discoveries are made. This chip/seal. It's a verification that the parts of the Old Testament - with names - are verified as this name just showed up. Meaning - those names weren't made up in the original texts.

Flipping through the Old Testament - it's one bad mistake after another for God's Chosen. Destruction, defeat, captivity, one after another - as they kept stumbling badly and couldn't follow the simple instructions they were given.

Now we see selective misdirection as they cant even look at the location specified in the texts. And the need for large volumes of water for the sacrifices.

I'd have not mentioned this again until I see someone is trying to connect the Temple Mount with the actual location of the Temple.

Because it's unjustified.
Click to expand...
Like I said, this isn’t my gig, and I find your assertions (use whatever word you find palatable here) interesting but I do not: read the Bible, read the Torah, know a thing about archaeology, know Hebrew or Aramaic… none of it… nor do I care where the temple was located because it’s all in Israel to me (though I get that if the temple wasn’t there, there’s less reason for contention in that spot).

But as a matter of common sense, I do not believe that all of these people are falsely praying at the western wall and trying to get onto the Al aqua compound to slaughter goats for centuries. And some of those praying there are from Mea Sharim - ultra orthodox, anti-******* Jews. They don’t have an “Israel” agenda so they believe that the location is there. You say otherwise. If I was qualified to speak more than I have on it I would. I would love to see the flip side (yes there’s a flip side, wrong or right) to what you are saying.
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
Like I said, this isn’t my gig, and I find your assertions (use whatever word you find palatable here) interesting but I do not: read the Bible, read the Torah, know a thing about archaeology, know Hebrew or Aramaic… none of it… nor do I care where the temple was located because it’s all in Israel to me (though I get that if the temple wasn’t there, there’s less reason for contention in that spot).

But as a matter of common sense, I do not believe that all of these people are falsely praying at the western wall and trying to get onto the Al aqua compound to slaughter goats for centuries. And some of those praying there are from Mea Sharim - ultra orthodox, anti-******* Jews. They don’t have an “Israel” agenda so they believe that the location is there. You say otherwise. If I was qualified to speak more than I have on it I would. I would love to see the flip side (yes there’s a flip side, wrong or right) to what you are saying.
Click to expand...

I guarantee, I'm not trying to be a smartasc - but I'd suggest I'm providing the flip side of what certain folks propose as the location of the former Temple.

I do understand you don't care for the details - but you should also understand that the Almighty is a stickler for details.

When the authorities say one thing - and a people say another by ignoring the authorities - and historical witnesses - then these people cannot be taken seriously.

Oh, it's known where the little creed bed is where David grabbed his stones just before slaying Goliath. It's known where different battles took place, names of specific mountains are - but the area of real contention - the location of the former Temple - is enthusiastically wrong.

No reason for contention.
 
Advertisement
This reminds me of what happened to a friend of mine. He had a $58 skid steer stolen, and the meth head was disassembling it with a torch and selling it for scrap metal.

 
Back
Top