Watchmen Weekly-Lightning

Watchmen Weekly- August 8, 2010– with Chris Ardern, Bob Gerrity, and Bill Johnson

Produced by Randy Maugans



The Watchmen weekly summit on current events, prophetic sign posts and scriptural rendering of the end times.

The Beast system, Noahide Laws,Matthew 24, the spirit of religion,the snare of “them who dwell on the earth,the strong delusion, the spirit of antichrist and Genesis 11, one language and one speech—the hive mind; famine of the Word; “christian” broadcasting and the voices of deception;the spiritual interpretation of the tribulation…and more.

Show Notes-WMW-Matthew-24-PDF


~ by watchmenweekly on August 23, 2010.

One Response to “Watchmen Weekly-Lightning”


    As Christians, we know that our body is the spiritual temple of the Lord, but, there was also a very real structure that was destroyed in the 1st century. There are also some very real efforts to rebuild such a Temple. In Chuck Misslers’ K-House eNews for the week of October 14, 2008, he offered a book that reflects the current thoughts on the Temple:
    The Coming Temple by Chuck Missler
    We know that the Temple in Jerusalem will be rebuilt. Paul, John, and our Lord all make reference to the Temple in events immediately preceding Christ’s Second Coming. In fact, the preparations have already begun.
    What is the prophetic significance of the current plans to rebuild the Temple? How have recent discoveries of modern science impacted the search for the location of the Temple? Did the Temple stand to the north of the Dome of the Rock…or to the south…or maybe exactly right where of the Dome of the Rock stands today?
    An earlier book, by Leen & Kathleen Ritmeyer, “Secrets of Jerusalem’s Temple Mount”, from 1998, was featured in, “Bible Archeology Review”. The book has a dozen possible sites for the original Jewish Temple, which was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD. The Haram esh-Sharif, or what most of the world calls the Temple Mount, is where all these locations must be, & yet, I’ve noticed some anomalies with this almost universal thought.
    In the book, the Ritmeyers wrote that, “At the NW corner of the Temple Mount stood the Antonia Fortress, built by by Herod on the site of an earlier fortress & named after Mark Anthony, the Roman commander. Josephus relates that the Antonia Fortress was built as a ‘guard to the Temple.’ Manned by a Roman legion, the fortress had a tower on each of its 4 corners. The SE tower was 70 cubits high (approximately 112 feet) & so commanded a view of the whole area of the Temple. Josephus tells us that the Antonia Fortress was erected on a rock 50 cubits (about 80 feet) high & was situated on a great precipice, although not a trace of the fortress itself has been found, one of the large buttresses was revealed in the tunneling conducted along the western wall by the Ministry of Religious Affairs.”
    Add that statement to the artists depiction [not pictured] of the Temple Mount area prior to its destruction, & you’ll notice that the Fortress is level with it, and in no way could it “view the whole area of the Temple.” Also, when I showed several of my friends this picture, they all thought that the fortress depicted was tiny, and in no way could it hold no more than 1000 soldiers, yet, a legion contains 3000 to 6000 soldiers! Its rather odd when Josephus mentions that it survived the destruction of 70 AD, but, Leen says that “not a trace of the fortress itself has been found.”
    Another problem with Ritmeyers’ book, is that they say, “On the Herodian street near the southwest corner of the Temple Mount, the excavators found a large stone block with a Hebrew inscription on it. Unfortunately, the end of the inscription is not on this fragment. The piece containing the final letters of the inscription had broken off, leaving the inscription to various interpretations. The surviving part of the inscription can be vocalizes l’bet hatqia lhak…which may be translated “to the place of trumpeting l’hak-…” Various possibilities have been suggested to complete l’hak–l’ha-kohn (for the priest); l’hekal (toward the Temple); or l’hakriz (to herald [the Sabbath]).”
    The problem, is that the artists depiction on p. 28, [not pictured] shows a priest blowing a trumpet & facing away from what would be the Temple area. Clearly, the priest is standing on the southwest corner looking south. In short, the evidence and the illustration provide us with a clear indication that the real location of the Temple was off of the Temple Mount entirely.
    A final red flag, is that the dimensions of the Temple Mount are 1590′ X 1035′ X 1536′ X 912′, and as the Ritmeyers admit, “that is not exactly rectangular.” This is true, but, one would expect more precision in the building of God’s House, wouldn’t you think so? The Ritmeyers conclude that a new Temple will be built on the Temple Mount and I agree with them.


    Ernest L. Martin, who founded Associates for Scriptural Knowledge, (ASK), > shows in “The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot,” beyond any doubt, that, what the world knows as the Temple Mount, has nothing to do with a site where any past Temples were, or where any future Temple site should be. What is known in Jerusalem as the Temple Mount, is actually the remains of Fort Antonia, which was a Roman City. The original site of the Temples was about a football field south of these ruins, over the Gihon Spring. When you go to the ASK website,, you’ll find fascinating artwork of what the area most likely looked like too. For verification, Dr Martin 1st turns to the Gospel of Luke, where Jesus says, at Chapter 19:43-44:
    “For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.”
    As a 2nd witness, he then quotes Luke again at 21:6, where Jesus says:
    “As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall be thrown down.”
    Similar accounts can also be found at Matthew 24:1-2, and Mark 13:1-2.
    The Greek word Jesus used in this prophetic context to describe the Temple and its buildings was ‘heiron.’ This means the entire Temple including its exterior building, the walls, and the real rock base, which was reckoned within the meaning of heiron. Scholars date the writing of Matthew between 70 to 80 A.D. When Matthew wrote his narrative, Jerusalem and the Temple were already destroyed by the Romans. He could have left this out of his records, if for all you had to do to disprove Jesus, was to open your eyes. But he didn’t because… NOT A TRACE OF IT WAS LEFT!
    Further, consider Micah 3:12 which says:
    “Therefore shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountains of the house as the high places of the forest.”
    Dr Martin includes eyewitness accounts by Josephus, as in Wars VII.8,6: “And where is now that great city [Jerusalem], the metropolis of the Jewish nation, which was fortified by so many walls round about, which had so many fortresses and large towers to defend it, which could hardly contain the instruments prepared for the war, and had so many ten thousands of men to fight for it? Where is this city that was believed to have God himself inhabiting therein? It is now demolished to the very foundations, and hath nothing left but that monument [Fort Antonia] of it preserved, I mean the camp of those [the Romans] that hath destroyed it, which [camp] still dwells upon its ruins; some unfortunate old men also lie upon the ashes of the Temple, and a few women are there preserved alive by the enemy, for our bitter shame and reproach.”
    I really cannot do Dr Martins’ book any justice by trying to condense it. I’ll just say that his conclusion is essential for research on the Temple.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: