The precise location of the Jewish temple is debated by scholars. Some believe that the holy of holies was located over the “rock” (es-Sakhra) under the Dome of the Rock. Others believe that the altar sat on this rock. A few have held that the holy of holies was situated about 100 yards to the north under the “Dome of the Tablets.” But no scholars doubt that the temple stood somewhere on the Temple Mount.
Robert Cornuke has a history of making sensational discoveries in the field of biblical archaeology.
He has located Mount Sinai, the Ark of the Covenant, Paul’s shipwreck, and he thinks he knows where Noah’s Ark is. In his latest effort to produce a bestseller, Cornuke argues that the temple was not on the Temple Mount but was located to the south in the City of David.
This proposal is absurd to anyone who is familiar with the geography and archaeology of Jerusalem.
Scholars don’t even waste their time on such theories. But sincere laypeople who lack a background in the subject are too easily misled by a selective presentation articulated by a charismatic former police investigator.
Gordon Franz has written a helpful explanation of Cornuke’s theory and its many weaknesses. He begins with an 8-point summary and links to his 46-page essay. I recommend it.
If you would rather just read the straight story on the Temple Mount, written by the world’s experts on the subject, grab Leen and Kathleen Ritmeyer’s new guide, Jerusalem: The Temple Mount.
