The true location of the Temple in Jerusalem

[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.

How long now have the muslims been rewriting Egyptian history to hide all evidence of Moses' exodus? Since, to this day, Christians are still a minority in Israel, what makes you think you know precisely where the temple was 2000yrs ago? Archeology has been using the Bible as its compass for hundreds of years and has proven the historical validity of scripture an hundred times over. So, the real question is why would YOU argue?

 

[JaumeJ]

The problem here is the word, theory.You want theories read Eindstein.

 

[Absolutely]

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...

It is a point of interest to me,mainly from my interest in history and ancient archeological sites.
But to see where the priests washed and the blood was handled is awesome.
I can't get the water dynamic out of my mind,how they,in the op point out the gishon spring. ( moving water).
Lots of water for the blood and purification of the priests

 

[JaumeJ]

If you like architecture look intoTel Megiddo. There are twenty-four foundations of cities shown in a dig there. I saw it when I was in Israel, it is fascinating, though not much to do with the Gospel other than being the city of Megiddo n the plain of Megiddow where the great battle will take place.

 

[iamsoandso]

It is a point of interest to me,mainly from my interest in history and ancient archeological sites.
But to see where the priests washed and the blood was handled is awesome.
I can't get the water dynamic out of my mind,how they,in the op point out the gishon spring. ( moving water).
Lots of water for the blood and purification of the priests

I argee it is interesting even to me , my point is of the ones trying to show every stone not one on another by saying it's somewhere else and proving it by showing another completely different set of stones. So if it's not the one set and, it's the other set it still is a set of stones sitting on each other. I'm just saying "stones" to explain. I cant see how the discovery of another set of stones would help their(preterist) case it actually makes it worse because now theres twice as many as thought,lol but go figure.