It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Haram had to house 6-10 thousand soldiers and 6000 support staff. The tiny little square inside the haram that modern scholars portray it as could not possibly house that many people.
And again the Jewish Temple had to be located by a spring to wash away the animal sacrifices.
It's the Christians and the Jews that propagate the false Temple location hoax, ask the Palestinians and they don't believe it.
So, are you one of those people that says Josephus exaggerated or lied?
Critics of Josephus regard him as an untrustworthy propagandist for the Flavian dynasty, as evidenced by his treatment of Titus' actions at the siege of Jerusalem. His descriptions of Titus saving an entire legion by single-handedly fighting back crowds of armed Judeans are laughable. But modern readings of Josephus treat these embarrassing passages with more sympathy. Josephus did not have freedom of speech: he was living under a dictatorship, and over the past century we have had ample understanding of what that does to a writer.
Steve Mason summarized the rules of first-century literary Rome thus: "Flattery of the princeps is non-negotiable, and it is something of a game to see who can configure an argument most favourable to Caesar." ("Figured Speech and Irony in Josephus," in Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome (Oxford, 2005), p. 259)
As an example, Josephus made use of the war commentaries ot Vespasian and Titus (Life 342, 358, Apion 1.56), and if those commentaries claimed incredible acts of bravery on the part of Titus how could Josephus possibly exclude them?
Fort Antonia was a defensible position but Herod reinforced it by adding long slabs of stone that made approaching the wall difficult and by creating a moat on the north side which was flooded with water.
Now it makes sense that the tenth legion that destroyed Jerusalem still needed a place to sleep and eat after a long days destroying the city and the temple .
When the rumor was spread that the tons of Gold in the temple had melted into the the mound which was quite porous the mound itself was raised down to bed rock by those looking for the gold. Sherlock asks Watson on a camping trip what do you see? Watson says I see millions of stars and waxing poetic says it makes me wonder about the universe and our place in it. No you idiot somebody stole our tent.
As far as the military organization of those days a Roman legion would always seek the high ground and only the governor of the province of Judea would live in a palace . All the soldiers lived in tents. So aside from the palace and two roman temples the place was a flat camp ground for the tenth Roman legion. iT was what you call an active defensive position with guards on patrol and watch towers.
In their military campaigns to conquer new territories the tactics of the Roman army never changed. The Baris and the latter Fort Antonia were a defensive fortress suitable for the tactics of those times.
I think you have been victim of an education in archeology that has left you no room for backing up from an indefensible position.
Ten generations of mistaken archeologists does not reality make. Evidence and logic does. By the way gates can be guarded and shut. Gates always make the best traps.
"If Roman legions sought high ground, why would they not occupy... the high ground? Why would they occupy the haram, when there are higher points all around it, to the north, west, and east (across Kidron on the Mount of Olives)? high points like, for instance, the high point to the north of it, where the actual Antonia Fortress was situated.
Who would have put enough labor into constructing the haram to simply make a "flat camp ground" for legionnaires?
None of this theory so far holds any water."
"So then it had to be at the bottom of the Kidron valley, and not on any ridge or prominence at all? Water does not flow uphill."
I am looking at a four foot long panoramic view of it from the mount of olives and it looks exactly like a fortress.
Two thousand years ago it must have looked even more like one.
It is not like the Romans were worried about any body attacking them either.
May I ask you a pertinent question? Have you been to Jerusalem? Or did you just attend seminary and believed the whole false story.
As far as many being wrong and just one person being right it has happened before. Some teachings are not allowed in academic circles because it would mean that generations of authors would be debunked after those same learning institutions were built on their reputations.
Have you heard about the geology teaching of inflation. It is taboo in most universities because it puts continental drift into question.
Most of my teaching would mean the closing of many theology universities. Like I said before in a world built on lies the truth is hardly welcome.
Einstein's theory of relativity was also rejected for a long time. Academic lies are just as vulnerable to truth as bold faced lies no matter how many believe it.
We've established that the Temple was NOT in the Haram, that the Haram IS the remains of Fort Antonia and that the Jewish Temple was located on the Ophel. Next I will demonstrate how water could be brought to the temple.