A Judicial Reform Rethink.

Jerusalem

Tel Aviv

75 years is but a fleeting moment for indigenous Israel. The complex nation was formally established more than 3300 years ago and its rituals emanate from ancestors a thousand years before that. Following the Holocaust, over the past 75 years, the instinct for survival inspired some communities to adopt extreme practices like religious isolation or secular assimilation. These emotive responses will dissipate to shape a future that is more true to its origin. Trust between those living at the extremes must be restored in order that the democratically elected representatives obtain the confidence of their electorates to govern authoritatively.

Israel is being besieged by an impassioned people intent on determining their destiny. The political crisis of 2018-2022 felled 5 successive coalition governments each time their ill-fated legislative bills exposed a lack of confidence. Finally the 2022/23 Netanyahu government obtained a sufficient majority to confidently pass legislation. The crisis marked a demographic tipping point, a shift to a more religious, conservative constituency that finally produced the robust majority. It also reflects on Israel's more liberal, less religious constituents who face very uncertain futures.

Hopeless liberals must reconsider their approach and support political personalities that adopt new strategies to win their favor, including from religious liberals. Many liberal bastions in foreign countries have been forced to make similar transitions to the center. However, in Israel the new strength of religious constituents is a dimension that has caused liberal leaders, who are less religious, to panic. How will they win votes from the liberal leaning, less religious constituents to marginalize conservative thinking, orthodox traditionalists? 

Israel is wonderful and miraculous, even the less religious would admit to it. Transforming the nation into a cohesive peace-time unit where people can retain strong, independent views and efficiently function side-by-side is the goal of any democratic society. How Israel will make this transformation could be its' biggest miracle of all!

Israel inherited the abandoned British government framework, it was flawed and immature compared to major democracies. Indigenous to Israel is a long forgotten framework that, more than ever, its' liberal constituents will be inspired to acknowledge and adopt to restore hope and resolve their present political impasse. The State comprises a majority traditional and religious people, but separation of 'Church' and State conflicts with its legislated, religious, orthodox implementation of Biblical-Rabbinic law that exposes societal division. American Reform and Liberal (or US Conservative) Jewish communities have also joined the political struggle for a less-religious Israeli state. 

Presently the Electoral College for Rabbinical representations of each Israeli city is an indigenously inspired institution that was bolted on after the formation of the State of Israel. Inherent in its mix of liberal (minded) and conservative Rabbis, of communities, is their potential and desire to earn more authority, from both political sides of the Jewish constituency. Such a representative achievement, through a single religious institution, would enable these representative Rabbis to gain community-wide authority such that adoption or modification of ancient Talmudic interpretations in Jewish and national law may better unite Jewish society in Israel. 

A modern, national extra-judicial body may be favored to represent societal views, establish customs and interpret or approve new laws that bring its indigenous nation up to date and keep it there. Liberal minded politicians and communities will be inspired and find it necessary to embrace indigenous Israel to advance this authority into the political realm. Through liberal leaning religious leadership they would reach new constituents and obtain political clarity that aligns with Israel's ancient system for a common identity. 

With support of liberal and conservative constituents, Mayors of Israel's cities, the Electoral College for City Rabbis and Religious Minster will become motivated and directed to advance these new representatives into the framework for government, perhaps the equivalent of a senate or upper house. 

Historically a similar authority was vested in a Sanhedrin, but for a political body to achieve the extra-judicial authority of Sanhedrin it would require respect and regard of Jews worldwide. The most religious, Hareidim prefer the status quo, rarely do Hareidi Rabbis compete for electoral representation to Israel’s city’s. However, they do participate in general elections and hold numerous powerful seats in the government. Once the institution of City Rabbis progresses from its present benign character to a more substantive arm of government, no doubt the Hareidim will compete for proportional representation. 

If I leaned left and less religious I would embrace the struggle to liberalize orthodoxy, if I leaned right and more religious I would struggle for religious authority. The Electoral College for City Rabbis is the best venue to politically define a modern, balanced religious authority that would be acceptable to world Jewry, through which religious and secular laws of Israel can ultimately converge so that the Sovereignty of Jewish Israel can be guaranteed and all people represented and governed under one body of law for all.

Government Reform Must Break the Status Quo!

In memory of Asher and Yaakov

Conversing with Israeli's about a one or two state solution can be a minefield. Those who want democracy-for-all are conflicted by the nature of Israel's neighbors, autocrats leading parliaments committed to religious ideologies just like the Palestinian Authority. For the past 16 years the major democracies have granted this Authority a no-election free-pass because its leader, Mahmoud Abbas, risks losing power to even more radical ideologists. 

Israel's' democracy-idealists are further conflicted by the fear they may be uprooted from their beloved homeland by a non-Jewish majority in a hypothetical single democratic state. Their concern is presently reflected in the behavior of the Palestinian Authority who will not tolerate Jewish representation in its government.

With no sign of peace the 40 year status quo is untenable and people on both sides continue to loose life in the tit-for-tat war against terror. Israel's romance with a democratic ideal may become intolerable and increasingly to blame for the ongoing loss of life. One must ask whether Israel's democratic idealists have come to accept loss of Jewish life as collateral in much the same way Muslim terrorists embrace their martyrs? 

The modern view of Israel's Jewish historical democracy is nearly always flawed, ignorant of the facts. Its ancient Jewish democracy was always governed by religious elders that comprised the main body of its legal and enforcement authority. Transfer of authority was autocratic through Semicha, or 'Standing' granted by incumbents to new authoritarians. One of today's arguments for judicial reform, by Israel's present government, is that its Justices have embraced authoritarianism, under a democracy that no longer resembles the indigenous framework that once tolerated it. 

Crosslinking risk to homeland, ongoing terror and the democratic ideal uphold the status quo. Like the well known business triangle, you can get something 'cheap' and 'good', but not 'quick', any two, but three cannot be logically connected. As a result Israeli's are begin to conclude that no-risk to homeland and peace is preferable to the foreign democratic ideal. Social and political change is resulting from Israel's seismic demographic shift. Innovative forms of government will ultimately enable Jewish sovereignty over its homeland and security for people in a government framework that moves the status quo toward a better outcome for all.

Israel's Electoral College presently oversees the periodic election of senior Rabbinical leaders from its hundreds of liberal and conservative communities in cities nationwide. With constituent support it can demand and deliver an elected upper house to Israel's Knesset that will yield two important requirements: 1. Ensure Jewish sovereignty in its system of government and 2. Permit the modernization of some of the nations ancient religious laws. In such a case representatives from any ethnic background may be elected to the lower Knesset, but only Rabbinical leaders may be elected to the upper Knesset where they would authorize bills exclusively introduced and drafted by the lower Knesset. 

The novel combination of this hybrid-authoritarian democracy would enable Israel to offer its aliens permanent residency and after qualifying, ultimately citizenship. This would embrace the majority of people trapped by the corrupted autocrats occupying Israel's land from the Shomron to Gaza under the Palestinian Authority and Hamas. Israel would finally be freed from its two-state quagmire and from the double standards of foreign governments and idealists that hold it to account. 

 

 

Why Hide Israel's Exodus Evidence?

The Amarna diplomatic letters exposed vassal relationships between field commanders who acted as local kings and Pharaoh their Egyptian ruler. Commanders of field garrisons defended Egyptian territories and at times expressed conflicting interests that triggered a spate of letter writing. Victories, defeats or political turmoil weighed heavily on the writings.

The tablets appear to have been buried with Akhenaten at El Amarna, but they are not the originals, mostly made of clay from areas east of the Jordan River, they are deemed authentic, diplomatic copies. One such letter #254 titled "Neither Rebel nor Delinquent" by Labaya, commander of the Samaria region from Sakmu the biblical city of Shechem, exposed serious allegations against him for having surrendered land to the Habiru (see Deuteronomy 11:30 and Genesis 12:6). This and the related letters further south at Uru-Salem, biblical Jerusalem discuss battles waged by the Habiru. 

Military correspondence from Canaan, in Egypt it was known as Retenju 

Dating and sources of the Amarna letters are thought to span Egyptian Pharaoh's Amenhotep III, Akhenaten, through possibly Smenkhkare or Tutankhamun around 150 years. These Pharaoh's may have overlapped the Israelite presence, enslavement in or exile from Egypt, early Canaanite wars and land resettlement. However, published chronologies have left much open to speculation, here we propose a resolution: The Labaya tablet #254 and others reference Pharaoh in his 32nd year of reign leaving only Amenhotep III who held power for 36-38 years during the Amarna period. According to the classic chronology Amenhotep III died in 1351 BCE.

The Bible describes Israel's 40 year sojourn after leaving Egypt, before it entered the land of Canaan where Joshua, the Israelite leader is said to have ruled 32 years after that. If there is a Biblical relationship to the Habiru, even if only some Habiru were Hebrew Israelite's raiding Canaan then letter #254 must have been written during the overlap of Amenhotep III and Joshua's 32 year reign, which according to the Biblical record ended in 1245 BCE. To align Amenhotep III and Joshua, the 100 year gap between the Bible and the Amarna records needs to be closed.

The eldest son of Amenhotep III, Prince Thutmose, died in the third decade of his fathers reign. Stepping in, his younger brother Amenhotep IV (also known as Akhenaten) became the "strange" Pharaoh as depicted in uncharacteristically abstract art from his reign. From evidence at Amarna we know the mummified elite of Egypt had a poor state of health despite opposite representations reflected in artwork of the time. Amarna depicts how distance enabled diplomatic façade, appearance of control and power, yet reality was always different. For Akhenaten losing control of Retjenu (Canaan) may have been his diplomatic inheritance and retrospective downfall in Egyptian art.

From the evidence, toward the end of the 13th century BCE, Papyrus Anastasi III, Merneptah Stele (1203 BCE), Egyptian late bronze age temple at Jerusalem's École biblique and tombs north and north-west of Jerusalem's Mount Moriah we learn about a prolonged Egyptian commitment and interest in Canaan during the approximately 250 years of military activity from Amenhotep III to Merneptah. In addition to its strategic and regional benefits, a long term commitment to hold Canaan may have been etched in the psyche of Egyptian leaders by Egypt's founder and first Pharaoh Khem (the ancient name given to Egypt km.t). According to the Biblical record Khem (Biblical Ham) may have incestuously fathered Canaan which explains why Canaan had no place in Egypt. The place name Canaan is common throughout Egyptian and Biblical records.

This 250 year, most tumultuous military period directly overlaps Israelite tribes who were displacing local Canaanite leaders and populations, long connected with Egypt, as they settled their indigenous land and entitlements east and west of the Jordan River. This re-settlement spanned a period of 300 years from Joshua until King David culminating the Israelite inheritance consistent with biblical teachings and tribal agreements.

In one letter, Adoni-Tzedek pleaded to convince Akhenaten to take the faster coastal route to rescue his dire situation in Jerusalem. And a letter, early in the reign of Akhenaten showed that the coast road was still open (pg278) which King Dusratta (Mitanni Empire) had written to his son-in-law Akhenaten twenty years later, but no help appears to have been sent. If this letter #254 describes the Biblical events that took place in 1273 BCE, at the beginning of Joshua's reign, which included a raid on Jerusalem, the Egyptian chronology immediately prior to the Amarna period would have to be revised forward by around ~100 years. This would be difficult for classical Egyptologists to digest. Joshua must then have overlapped Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, which if we wind back 40 years, would make Thutmose IV the prime candidate at the time of the Israelite Exodus led by Moses. 

Even though the lower Galilee was, for some few years subdued, under Philistia and Syria it was reconquered by Rameses II, whose battle relief also mentions "Shalem" (Jerusalem). However, historians have revealed that neither Rameses II or his garrisons ever entered the Judæan mountains because they were impassable for chariots, Egypt's supreme weapon of war. Seemingly, Jerusalem had been abandoned by Rameses II as well.

The events placed in these time frames may help us to better understand Egypt's political events, that pre-dated Moses, when "Pithom and Rameses", Egyptian cities built by Israelite slaves, may have underwritten the economic and political impetus that promoted the "House of Rameses" to ultimately obtain the status of Pharaoh over all of Egypt. By the time Rameses I and II became Pharaoh's it was already the latter half of Israel's 300 year resettlement of Canaan as recorded in The Book of Judges.

Often overlooked is the earliest recorded use of the Hebrew language by Eber (great-grandson of Noah) preceding Biblical Abraham, whose father, Terach and their extended families continued to live in Haran, northern Syria. They were the Ivri or Ibri also likely referred to as Habiru, but their various lineages were not Israelite. Regardless, the Habiru referred in the Amarna letters are certainly those Israelites, the Hebrew speakers, who had arrived from Egypt to conquer and re-settle Canaan.

Jerusalem's Critical Evidence?

Seldom does a "terminus post quem", the earliest date an item came into existence, and a "terminus ante quem", the latest, perfectly sandwich the artifact to define its absolute archaeological age. 

In ancient Jerusalem, on Mount Moriah's eastern slope, a crucial study by Weizmann Institute, Tel Aviv University and Israel Antiquities Authority dated evidence in a drainage channel, beneath and above a plaster layer that was built on top of clay-rich, virgin soil in a natural bedrock cavity. 

Directly beneath the plaster (its earliest date), small charcoal flecks were dated separately (sample 10293 and 9965) between 1615–1545 BCE, a "terminus post-quem" for plaster in the channel. At the bottom of the channel, above the plaster (the latest date) several grey and white laminations were found with charred material (sample 9964 and 10292), "ante-quem", understood to represent the channel was last used between 1535 and 1445 BCE.

During these approximately 100 years the drainage channel was used to propel water (by gravity) onto the bedrock floor of at least one of two rooms of the Temple Zero complex immediately below (east of) AreaU. In each room slaughtered animals would have frequently been processed and offered as a sacrifice, thus requiring water be flushed via the channel to clean blood and excrement. Almost 600 years later similar hydraulic systems were engineered and used in the first and second temples further up the mountain.  

According to Biblical chronology Jacob and his family arrived on Mount Moriah in 1553 BCE then left the region in 1523 BCE and lived in exile, in Egypt, where they remained for 210 years before the nation journeyed back to their land. The overlapping 100 year use of the drainage channel with time of Jacob makes this discovery remarkable particularly because of its potentially exciting context to the Temple Zero location.

In the Biblical context of Area U, the rock-cut-rooms of Temple Zero and the Gihon Spring, Bible commentators relate events of Adam, Noah, Shem or Malchi-Tzedek, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joshua, King David and subsequent kings. Spanning thousands of years, the area on Mount Moriah is also referred by many names including; Salem, Beit El, Yireh (Yireh-Salem), Luz, Tzion, Jebus, City of David and Jerusalem. 

Immediately after King Solomon, King Jeroboam mis-directed and split the nation in part by leveraging confusion over Jacob's Beit El. Therefore, his actions and motivations must be understood before one can truly appreciate the magnitude of  discoveries being made at Temple Zero, Jerusalem. The recently discovered, possible City of Ai (associated with Beit El) is located just 1.3 kilometers east of  Temple Zero, resolves Jeroboam's Bethel ruse, 17km north, establishing Jerusalem's Temple Zero the exclusive, common Beit El of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-8, 13:3-4) and Jacob (Genesis 28:11, 35:14).

By aligning the city of Ai and Biblical events with the 100 year overlapping use of the drainage channel, confidence rises that Temple Zero is the location Jacob erected the recently discovered matzevah on which he made a covenant, to which he returned and accepted upon himself the name "Israel". 

For the modern nation to rediscover the original beacon, erected by Jacob on which he accepted the name of their national identity would be nothing short of miraculous, perhaps too much for the archaeological fraternity to acknowledge.

 

Jerusalem's Middle Bronze Yeshiva

    

Reconciling the Biblical record with archaeology is complex. Sometimes it exposes ambiguities in  interpretations of various commentaries. In contrast to mainstream commentators, Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba clarified Genesis 25:17 that Jacob spent 14 years in the school of Shem and Ever after leaving his father Isaac, but before arriving at his uncle Laban, who lived in Haran (northern Syria). This distinction helped align the archaeology on the eastern slope of ancient Jerusalem. 

An event described by the word "va-yi[Ph][G]ah" explained that Jacob "stumbled" upon a certain "place". The place is unanimously considered to be on Mount Moriah, the mountain on which ancient Jerusalem was built. It was also named Beit-El (House of God), which became common and caused mainstream commentators to bestow a super-rational explanation on the "va-yi[Ph][G]ah" place.

All commentators associate the "va-yi[Ph][G]ah" place with the landmark that Adam, Noah, Malchi-Tzedek (Shem), Abraham, Isaac and Jacob identified with the holy mountain. The Bible calls it SaLem (completion), and Abraham called it Yi-Reh (vision), in combination YiReh-SaLem became Jerusalem meaning 'complete vision'. Today we may loosely infer it as that flash of insight that crystalizes a 20-20 vision on the subject in the recipients mind. 

Jacob stumbled on the place, then experienced a powerful dream, a vision that he memorialized using a standing-stone as his permanent covenant to build and dedicate the House of God. Right after that he hid for 14 years in the school of his ancient relatives Shem and his great-grandson Ever learning the folklore and ancient mystical secrets before he departed for Haran. 

Jacob's standing-stone also known as a matzevah?

It follows the events that caused him to react; "How awesome is this place!" also attracted and compelled him to stay on the holy mountain where the school of Shem and Ever may have been located. Recent excavations in the cavernous bedrock of the east facing slope of Mount Moriah have revealed Middle Bronze Age facilities that may very well have accommodated residents and students who may have frequented the area.    

In Finding Zion, I provide a detailed account of the discoveries in the immediate vicinity of the "va-yi[Ph][G]ah" place, adjacent to the Gihon Spring where much of the Biblical account is being clarified through archaeological discoveries and insightful interpretations.

Jerusalem's Temple Zero Underground

Temple Zero Excavation (north end)

Temple Zero Excavation (south end)

More than 500 years before King David Temple Zero, in Ancient Jerusalem's City of David had been constructed, used regularly and completely buried by falling groundcover. Whether King David ever re-discovered Temple Zero, or King Uzziah or Hezekiah were the first to re-discover it is debated here. Recently excavated elements, located on east and west adjacencies of Temple Zero, under virgin soil, in an ash layer above bedrock and a defensive wall prove the hypothesis that King David never discovered it. The discovery presents Temple Zero as a legitimate contender for the altar of the future temple in Jerusalem.

  

https://youtu.be/2SQLvV68Uc4

Seeds of wheat and barley, in a delicate 2m long, 1cm thick layer of ash, 5cm above bedrock, lay undisturbed from Middle Bronze Age through the Iron Age period of King David until King Uzziah or Hezekiah and remained in place until their recent extraction. This delicate ash layer was preserved only because soft dirt had accumulated above it. In the ash, one seed was preserved under the wall of a late Iron Age building the other under collapsed rocks from surrounding Iron Age constructions. These seeds were carbon dated ~3290 years before the present (using 1950 as the reference age) and corelated to Middle Bronze Age archaeology of 1605-1510 BCE. 

Area U in pink (also map below).
Western edge of Temple Zero (greyed) in center of pink border

Water channel (Blue)

Iron Age wall constructors would first probe soft dirt until they discovered underlying bedrock sufficient to support wall construction. Then, they would remove soil and other moveable elements until they located the full length of bedrock necessary to support the wall width and length. On that they built their wall.

The Iron Age buildings were constructed after the wall, along Temple Zero's westernmost edge of Area U (map below) on the elevated edge of its rock-cut-rooms. The bedrock edge drops down the sheer east facing walls, of hollowed bedrock rooms 1.5-2m to the bedrock floor of the Temple Zero complex. Well before the Iron Age, the hollowed out rooms had once been filled with accumulated sand or natural dirt, that fell down the slope burying Temple Zero to a depth of  at least 1.5-2m. 

Red dots mark carbon dated evidence
  Iron Age walls (red) on western edge
of Temple Zero's rock-cut-rooms

Heights above sea level

Less than 10 meters east, further down slope toward the valley, additional evidence was found, between bedrock and leveling rocks supporting a Middle Bronze Age wall (red dots on the image above-right). This indicates earth below the supporting rocks of the walls base had been used 150-200 years before the seeds trapped in the ash layer (further to the west). However, around 1m above the bedrock additional evidence, taken from the walls' mortar, revealed entrapped seeds of a similar date as the ash layer seeds. Therefore, the walls foundation layers were constructed on a base above bedrock more than 150 years earlier, shown in the image below. 

Large rock placed on smaller supporting rocks
near the bedrock base, site of earlier dated evidence

Curiously the study identified an unusual 17th century gap in evidence, indicating that the entire area went out of use during the 50-75 years that preceded the ash layer seeds and the building of this small Middle Bronze Age wall.  

This evidence at the rock-cut-rooms of Temple Zero strongly points to a natural burial, by slippage, wash, wind and accumulation. It is widely known to archaeologists that a location on a steep slope, such as this site, on the east of Mount Moriah would naturally accumulate sufficient dirt to be entirely covered over within 5 years. Complete burial would naturally obfuscate the existence of Temple Zero's rock-cut-rooms.

Since Temple Zero was buried underground sometime in the 17th century it would not have been used for active worship during the 10th century reign of King David because the evidence in the drainage channel was undisturbed. The next time all of Temple Zero's rock-cut-rooms were exposed was during the bedrock discovery phase, required for construction of Jerusalem's massive eastern defensive wall, in the 8th century leading up to or during the reign of King Hezekiah. Almost 1000 years after the seeds became trapped in the ash layer, constructors of the massive defensive wall discovered, preserved and re-buried Temple Zero where it remained for another 2600 years until it was recently discovered in 2011.

The implications of this study are important because they provide a credible reason why Temple Zero was never discovered by King David and how the fragile matzevah (Stone of Israel), located in Temple Zero survived in its original place, preserved in soft sand, in tact all these years. One can only imagine what King Hezekiah's Iron Age wall constructors must have thought when they discovered and preserved it for our generation?

Finding Zion!

A decade of persistent effort by the El Ad foundation, The City of David and archaeologists from Israel's Antiquities Authority has produced sensational results on the eastern slope of Jerusalem's Mount Moriah. More than ever before, evidence and context have reduced events to a narrow range of comprehensible theories. Now, we are left to ponder the most perplexing question of all...

The Gihon Spring, near the Kidron Valley floor was ancient Jerusalem's only perpetual water source. It sustained Paleolithic, Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age populations who lived in proximity to the valley until around 4000-3800 years ago. In the Middle Bronze Age, commensurate with Biblical Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob populations migrated 50+ vertical meters further up the steep east facing slope to live on the mountains' ridge. For these occupants, access and secure passage of water, from the spring became crucial to successful survival. 

Mount Moriah, one rock

During the past 15 years several key discoveries have informed our knowledge of the eastern slope: 

1. Cave K 

Recent excavations identified a tightly packed, richly layered floor that should reveal information about the historical and chronological use of the cave. Work, presently underway indicates a usage spanning terminal Iron Age back to the Bronze Age. The cave was an important accommodation for occupants of the lower mountain. The cave exit/entrance, on its north-west end once connected with Passage XVIII that runs west, connecting Cave K with a rock-cut-temple around 10 vertical meters higher up the slope. 

North Entrance

Level crossing, from Cave K over the lower bedrock once provided convenient access to water from the Gihon Spring.

2. Passage XVIII

The remnant of this bedrock passage climbs up from the roof level of Cave K to the rock-cut-temple, due west, at a steep grade 10m further up the eastern face. The Cave K end of the passage appears to have been quarried or fissured and breaks lower level access to passage XVIII. Organic materials, found in mortar of a wall built in this passage was carbon dated to 3700-3500 years ago. This evidence aligned with similar materials discovered in a drainage channel along the west boundary immediately behind the rock-cut-temple. The organic material indicated that construction on the passage had occurred sometime during this period and provides evidence of its use during the middle bronze age.

3. Rock-Cut-Temple

Excavation to expose Rock-Cut-Temple

This is arguably the most fascinating complex of Mount Moriah's eastern face. The temple cut in the  rock contains all of the necessary elements for worship, similar to the practices that followed in King Solomon's First Temple as widely document in ancient Jewish texts. The features include (looking West); 

Matzevah in the cabinet (left) - Altar Platform, liquids channel (right)

Matzevah

Altar platform and liquids channel

A Matzevah or standing stone was forbidden by Biblical law for use in any Jewish worship. Therefore, the practice ceased around 3300 years ago, some 300 years before King David arrived on Jerusalem's Mount Moriah. Prior to that, use of a matzevah was permitted as referred in Biblical Jacob and has been widely reported in archaeology. However, this humble matzevah is unique in all Israeli archaeology. The altars' liquids channel and altar platform once supported a stone altar on which animal sacrifices were offered.

To the left (south) of the matzevah 'V' cuts in the bedrock used for slaughtering, processing and preparing animal sacrifices. The room also contains a sunken mortar for crushing grains. To the right (north) of the altar platform an olive press for preparing pure olive oil, of the highest grade to be used for anointing and preparing baked sacrificial offerings.

North over the olive press

Looking north over the oil press, passage XIX is terminated by Wall 108 (see map below). The northern wall W108, of the double wall was excavated and dated along with W109 to the Middle Bronze Age. It is still unknown as to why the double wall was built and this remains one of the more perplexing elements of the temple complex.  

4. Wall 108 and 109

The double wall complex was one of the most challenging constructions in the City of David and certainly on the eastern face. Massive boulders stacked to a height of up to 5 meters had to be hauled up, or lowered down the slope and precisely placed. It was a serious construction requiring a labor force greater than the size of the entire local population of the mountain. It is presently anticipated that the passage between the double walls was sealed, a ziggurat type structure that led worshipers on an ascent to passage XIX where they would turn left (south) and proceed to the rock-cut-temple complex. 

A recent discovery (see image below) confirmed that the double walls abutt passage XIX, but that W108 (north, top of picture) extended through the passage further west blocking north-south access. W109 meets the passage and would have ensured foot traffic, between the walls, was guided to the south along passage XIX toward the rock-cut-temple complex.  

Looking North, at the top, large steps
between W108 (north) and W109

5. Defensive wall 

As confirmed by surviving organic material, 1000 years after the rock-cut-temple were last used, toward the end of the iron age, a defensive city wall was built on the eastern face of the mountain. The wall was constructed over the rock-cut-temple and soft sand (discovered in 2011) was used to fill the spaces between the wall and the bedrock to protect the matzevah from damage by the heavy rocks of the wall. That decision, most likely by King Uzziah or Hezekiah, preserved the matzevah for 2600 years until it was discovered in-situ by archaeologist Eli Shukron in 2011. However, the wall constructors cleared the rock-cut-temple artifacts leaving only a small amount of Middle Bronze age pottery in the room adjacent to the altar.

Significant scale wall (looking north).
 Top right of the wall intersects W108.

6. Question

If the rock-cut-temple was last used around 3500 years ago (the time of the surviving organic matter, particularly the remnant discovered in the drainage channel) it is conceivable the entire rock-cut-temple lay buried under earth and silt, unused for almost 1000 years before Hezekiah's wall was built, 2600 years ago in the lead up to the destruction of the first temple. The wall constructors would have exposed the rock-cut-temple, its artifacts and the matzevah causing the King at that time to decide what next? We now know that the defensive wall was constructed over the rock-cut-temple, but the constructors preserved the matzevah indicating respect and honor. If Hezekiah was king at the time and believed the matzevah were an object of idolatry his constructors would certainly have destroyed it.

On this evidence we must ask whether King David, who was compelled to this mountain, ever discovered the rock-cut-temple that existed 700 years before he became King?

2 Samuel 5:7–9 tells us; David conquered the “fortress of Zion that is the City of David,” after which he is said to have built “from the Millo inward”. The fortress David captured (thought to be the Spring Tower, see map above including W108 and W109) gave him full control over the precious water supply lines inward to the Gihon Spring. That's all it took to conquer the city 50m up the hill that was dependent on the Spring. 

Did the 700 year legacy of priesthood and ancestral history, at the rock-cut-temple motivate David to capture and locate Zion? Did he ever find it?

Hezekiah's Dilemma

Hezekiah's Seal

I was surprised to read a sequence in Talmud, Sanhedrin (95-97) that connects several mysteries related to contraction of land, suspension of the sun's orbit, Jerusalem and a messianic prophecy. 

First in the sequence, Avishai saved King David's life. (95a:8) But, Tanach and midrash inform us that after King David's sinful census 70,000 in Israel's north were killed, the next day, on the summit of Jerusalem's Mount Moriah, when the angel of death was poised to destroy Jerusalem, Avishai was sacrificed to pacify the angel and prevent Jerusalem's destruction. At the foot of the angel of death David offered his personal sacrifice and that site would become the future altar of Jerusalem's first temple. This story is reflected in the 'sword over Jerusalem', words that are said each year at Passover tables the world over.  

Next, Talmud steps the reader back ~500 years to the time Jacob returned and stumbled on 'the place' his fathers prayed (95b:1). By this, midrashim and commentaries we know 'the place' to be the Beit El of Abraham and Jacob, the Akeida (binding) of Isaac, which according to Jewish law will be the place of the future temple altar.

Then, the reader steps forward ~1000 years to learn of Hezekiah's failure to obtain his Messianic designation after Sancheirev attempted to destroy Jerusalem (95b:14). In other places we learn that Hezekiah' failed because he did not immediately attribute the saving of Jerusalem to Divine intervention. Then, Sancheirev was killed by his sons (age 64 - c.681BCE) and Nebuchadnezzar seized control of the Babylonian-Assyrian alliance. Around 100 years after Sancheirev's failed attempt, Nebuchadnezzar dispatched Nebuzaradan and destroyed Jerusalem (96b:4).

Among the brutal detail of Jerusalem's destruction we learn Merodach-Baladan, who preceded Sancheirev, as king of Babylonia, (96a:10) wrote a letter to encourage Hezekiah shortly after he recovered from a near-fatal illness. Young Nebuchadnezzar was the scribe to Merodach-Baladan, but did not draft nor agree with the content of the letter. Hezekiah lived another 15 years (died aged 52 c.687 BCE), around the age of 37 he would have received the letter. 

Finally the Talmud continues a detailed conversation about the Messianic redemption following a sabbatical year (97a:1-10).

In a recent archaeological discovery, the defensive city wall that Hezekiah built to protect Jerusalem from the wrath of Sancheirev's doomed army was uncovered, but it presented an intriguing puzzle about the date of its construction. 

We asked whether the onset of Hezekiah's illness coincided with the city wall construction? If so, the constructors would have commenced during his early 30's, c.707 BCE and discovery of rock-cut-rooms, in the path of the wall construction may have presented a serious dilemma? Carbon dated evidence suggests, for more than five centuries the rock-cut-rooms lay buried below meters of dirt and debris supporting their spontaneous discovery that probably delayed construction until a decision about their treatment was reached. 

Why the dilemma? Well, one thing is for sure, the flimsy matzevah discovered in (2010 by Eli Shukron), in the rock-cut-rooms was preserved by Hezekiah's constructors and remains a declaration of its holy, non-idolatrous status. If not they would certainly have destroyed it, instead they preserved it in soft sand and built the defensive city wall alongside it to the east. We will never know what other  Bronze Age artefacts may have also been discovered at that time (Eli Shukron found some), but we see, from Hezekiah's actions the matzevah was important.

The fact the rock-cut-room temple complex preceded Solomon's temple surely would have prompted Hezekiah to ask why Solomon's temple was built in a different location, further up the mountain? How would Hezekiah, the one designated for messianic status answer that question? Was this 'the place' Jacob stumbled, where he dreamed of a stairway to heaven, set his matzevah (pillar), the place spanning time back to Akeida and beyond to Malchi-Tzedek and the original temple of Jerusalem? 

Walk in Hezekiah's shoes and ponder the depth of his dilemma.

 

Anceint Jerusalem Walks and Quacks Like a Duck...

 

The Matzevah of Jacob?

According to carbon dating the rock-cut-rooms on Mount Moriah's east facing slope were not discovered by King David (~3000 years ago) and the matzevah, located in the rooms may have been erected by Jacob (~3600 years ago). After King David, ~2700 years ago, when King Hezekiah discovered the rooms and the matzevah, during his defensive wall construction, he preserved it in soft sand and left it intact against the new city wall.  If he didn't think it were holy, he would have destroyed it along with the other idolatry that was destroyed. Thanks to his decision it was re-discovered in 2010.

The evidence from Weismann and Cambridge confirm organic remnants, found adjacent to the rooms date back 3500-3800 years overlapping with Jacob and accumulating evidence overwhelmingly reenforces the Jacob hypothesis as follows:. 

1. Carbon dating confirmed the rock-cut-room's immediate adjacencies were in use 3500-3800 years ago

2. In situ, organic samples, at a height of 1.2 meters above the bedrock and in compressed earth of a water channel indicate surface dirt would have accumulated for 500 years or more, from 3500 years to 3000 years ago and entirely buried the rock-cut-rooms.

2. Use of a matzevah was banned from the time of Moses (3300 years ago) as recorded in Torah law. King David (3000 years ago) would never have breached Torah law.

3. The altar in the rock-cut-rooms is holy according to Torah law. It faces west, meaning priests would have their backs to the sun, which would be against the principles of east facing sun worship.

4. Hezekiah (2700 years ago) cleared the bedrock artifacts to build the city defensive wall, but he preserved the free-standing matzevah. 

5. During the Middle Bronze Age (MBII = 3800-3500 years ago), Wall 108 and 109 of the fortified passage led people from the lower levels of the eastern slope to the rock-cut-rooms.

6. A simultaneous discovery in 2010, around 1.3 KM east of the rock-cut-rooms could confirm the enigmatic City of Ai.

This accumulating body of evidence make it increasingly difficult to refute the suggestion that the rock-cut-rooms are the location of Jacob's matzevah, Isaac's Akeida and Abrahams Beit El.

It is important to acknowledge the remarkable work of archaeologists and scholars, but its much more important to identify that our discovery of the location King David so desperately sought is part of a much greater awakening. 

More here: 

 

The Enigma of Ai

Many have searched for the elusive ancient city of Ai, but so far no suitable candidate has gained comprehensive support from archaeology and biblical scholars. However, one recently discovered location has been missed, not spoken of very much and not identified with any other previous locations. Uncannily, it was excavated in 2008/9 simultaneous with the the rock-cut-rooms on the eastern slope of Mount Moriah, 1.3 kilometers to the west.

East of Beit El, West of Ai

IMPORTANT: Jeroboam established a competitive Bethel, that confounds people to this day.

To resolve confusion, the image above satisfies each of the five places, in the Bible that link Bethel and Ai. For the correct archaeological site to be identified, each description must conform to the precise physical location.

a. Abraham’s tent: "From there he moved on to the hill east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; and he built there an altar to the Lord and invoked the Lord by name." (Genesis 12:1-8)

          

And he returned by stages from the Negev as far as Bethel, to the place where his tent had been formerly, between Bethel and Ai, the site of the altar that he had built there at first; and there Abram invoked the Lord by name. (Genesis 13:3-4)

b. The conquest of Ai: “Joshua sent men from Jericho to Ai, which lies close to Beth-aven – east of Bethel” (Joshua 7:2). Joshua set an ambush of thirty thousand warriors, followed by a second ambush of five thousand, strategically placed “between Bethel and Ai – west of Ai.” When Joshua and his men feigned retreat, the armies of both cities pursued their Israelite foes, leaving the cities defenseless against the hidden ambush: “Not a man was left in Ai or in Bethel who did not go out after Israel; they left the city open while they pursued Israel” (Joshua 8:17).

c. The 31 Canaanite kings: One of the kings listed is “the king of Ai, near Bethel” (Joshua 12:8).

d. The returnees from exile (in Zerubbabel’s time): ...of those “who returned to Jerusalem and Judah, each to his own city” (Ezra 2:1; Nehemiah 7:6), the returnees are organized by point of origin. There we find: “The men of Bethel and Ai – 223” (Ezra 2:28; in Nehemiah 7:32 the number is given as 123).

e. The final listing of the people of Israel: “The Benjaminites: from Geba, Michmash, Aija [Ai] and Bethel and its outlying towns” (Nehemiah 11:31).

In each of the above cases the excavation at Ras al-Amud fits the correct location, time period and scale for the missing city of Ai. 

City of Ai at Ras Al Amud, finally located

In the rectangle original Beit El before the walled city.
Approximately 800m west of Ai
Boundary - Benjamin (north) and Judah (south).

The hypothesis for original Beit El is strengthened by archeological findings and carbon dating. Details in the video below.

 

“Jacob Gave The Name Beit El To Jerusalem”

 

Click to enlarge

בראשית כ״ח:י״א

(יא) וַיִּפְגַּ֨ע בַּמָּק֜וֹם וַיָּ֤לֶן שָׁם֙ כִּי־בָ֣א הַשֶּׁ֔מֶשׁ וַיִּקַּח֙ מֵאַבְנֵ֣י הַמָּק֔וֹם וַיָּ֖שֶׂם מְרַֽאֲשֹׁתָ֑יו וַיִּשְׁכַּ֖ב בַּמָּק֥וֹם הַהֽוּא׃
Genesis 28:11
(11) He came upon a certain place and stopped there for the night, for the sun had set. Taking one of the stones of that place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place.

Rashi verbatim

THIS IS NONE OTHER THAN THE HOUSE OF GOD —R. Eleazar said in the name of R. José the son of Zimra: “This ladder stood in Beersheba and [the middle of]) its slope reached opposite the Temple” (Genesis Rabbah 69:7). For Beersheba is situated in the South of Judah, Jerusalem in the North of it on the boundary between Judah and Benjamin and Bethel in the North of Benjamin’s territory, on the border between the land of Benjamin and that of the children of Joseph. It follows, therefore, that a ladder whose foot is in Beersheba and whose top is in Bethel has the middle of its slope reaching opposite Jerusalem. 

Now as regards what our Rabbis stated (Chullin 91b) that the Holy One, blessed be He, said, “This righteous man has came to the place where I dwell (i.e., the Temple at Jerusalem, whilst from here it is evident that he had come to Luz) and shall he depart without staying here over night?”, and with regard to what they also said, (Pesachim 88a) “Jacob gave the name Bethel to Jerusalem”, whereas this place which he called Bethel was Luz and not Jerusalem, whence did they learn to make this statement (which implies that Luz is identical with Jerusalem)? 

I say that Mount Moriah was forcibly removed from its locality and came hither (to Luz), and that this is what is meant by the “shrinking” of the ground that is mentioned in the Treatise (Chullin 91b) — that the site of the Temple came towards him (Jacob) as far as Bethel and this too is what is meant by ויפגע במקום, “he lighted upon the place” (i.e., he “met” the place, as two people meet who are moving towards each other; cf. Rashi on Genesis 5:11). Now, since Jacob’s route must have been from Beersheba to Jerusalem and thence to Luz and Haran and consequently when he reached Luz he had passed Jerusalem, if you should ask, “When Jacob passed the Temple why did He not make him stop there?” — If it never entered his mind to pray at the spot where his fathers had prayed should Heaven force him to stop there to do so? Really he had reached as far as Haran as we say in the Chapter גיד הנשה (Chullin 91b), and Scripture itself proves this since it states, “And he went to Haran”. When he arrived at Haran he said, “Is it possible that I have passed the place where my fathers prayed without myself praying there?” He decided to return and got as far as Bethel where the ground "shrank” for him. This Bethel is not the Bethel that is near Ai (cf. Genesis 12:8) but that which is near Jerusalem, and because he said of it, “It shall be the House of God”, he called it Bethel. This, too, is Mount Moriah, where Abraham prayed, and it is also the field in which Isaac offered prayer as it is written, “[Isaac went out] to meditate (i. e., to pray; cf. Genesis 24:63) in the field”.

Thus, too, do we read in the Treatise (Pesachim 88a) in a comment on the verse Micah 4:2: “[O come ye and let us go up] to the mountain of the Lord (i.e. the mountain upon which the Temple is built) and to the house of the God of Jacob”. What particular reason is there for mentioning Jacob? But the text calls the Temple not as Abraham did who called it a mount, and not as Isaac did, who called it a field, but as Jacob did who called it Beth[el]—the House of God. (To here from “This Bethel” is to be found in a certain correct Rashi-text)