The location of the third temple – new developments

Originally posted on October 18, 2025 – by Andre Piet

In February 2020, an article appeared on this website titled the location of the coming temple. In it, the question was raised whether the temple of Jerusalem really stood on the site that is traditionally pointed to today: the platform known as the Haram al-Sharif, on which the Dome of the Rock and the al-Aqsa Mosque are located.

That article, drawing in part on the research of Dr. Ernest L. Martin (The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot), presented the scenario that this platform is not the Temple Mount, but the Roman Fort Antonia. The actual temple location would then have to be sought further south, in the City of David, near the Gihon Spring. At the time, this was an eccentric and little-known idea. By now, however, there are developments that are bringing this scenario to attention with increasing urgency.

the temple not on the platform but near the Gihon Spring

The basis for the alternative temple location is simple and biblically supported: the sanctuary had to be supplied with “living water” for ritual cleansing (Lev. 14:5; Num. 19:17). The only natural spring in Jerusalem was – and still is – the Gihon Spring, located in the City of David. On the present-day Haram al-Sharif, there is no natural water source. In contrast, near the Gihon Spring we find extensive water installations, basins, and channels that point to intensive cultic use. In 1 Kings 1:38–39 we read that Solomon was anointed king at this spring. That this happened there is difficult to separate from the sacred status that this location held.

Revelation 11 was also mentioned at the time as a striking confirmation. There, a temple is described that is being measured, but the “court outside the temple” is explicitly excluded because it is given to the nations. That matches the current situation in a remarkable way: the Haram al-Sharif lies within Jerusalem but is not under Jewish control; its administration is in the hands of Jordan and the Islamic world. The idea that the temple will be rebuilt next to this platform – and not on it – is increasingly gaining relevance.

archaeological developments since 2020

Since the publication of the aforementioned article in 2020, significant discoveries have been made in the City of David. Israeli archaeologist Dr. Eli Shukron, who was affiliated for many years with the Israel Antiquities Authority, has found compelling evidence of an early cultic site directly at the Gihon Spring. In recent publications and interviews, he has stated that he locates the oldest sacred place of Jerusalem at that very spot. He points to massive platforms, ritual baths, and water channels that indicate priestly activity. According to Shukron, this is “the place where Jerusalem began as a holy city.”

In addition, there is growing attention to the question of whether the current Temple Mount is indeed the only option for the historical temple location. While the traditional view—that the temple stood on the present-day platform—still dominates, recent studies suggest that the City of David may have been the original sacred center. The findings near the Gihon Spring closely align with the biblical requirements for temple service, including the presence of living water. The absence of such a source on the current platform raises the question of the exact location once again.

These developments are no longer peripheral but are being discussed in serious archaeological publications and presentations within Israel. What was still largely a hypothesis in 2020 has now become a subject of investigation and debate.

shift in Jewish awareness

Change is also becoming visible within the Jewish world. Organizations involved in temple preparation, such as the Temple Institute, no longer speak with absolute certainty about the exact location of the temple, but instead refer to “ongoing research.” Rabbis such as Yehuda Glick (former Knesset member and advocate for the rebuilding of the temple) have publicly stated that the LORD is giving new light on this matter in our days, and that the question of the original temple location is a subject of ongoing revelation and investigation.

Additionally, there is growing awareness in broader religious circles that the Haram al-Sharif is under the legal and religious control of the nations. This strengthens the idea that the temple cannot be built on that platform, but must be built outside of it. This shift is partly opportunistic, but not without significance. What for years was considered unspeakable is now cautiously being put into words—not on the fringes, but within circles seriously engaged in preparations for a future temple.

geopolitical conditions creating space

While the temple question long remained theoretical, the geopolitical context of recent years has changed noticeably. The Abraham Accords initiated discussions on interreligious cooperation in Jerusalem. In that context, the Temple Mount has repeatedly been referred to as a “house of prayer for all peoples” – an expression taken directly from the prophet Isaiah.

Based on the traditional assumption that the temple must be built where the Dome of the Rock now stands, such a notion was essentially unthinkable. But if the temple is located elsewhere – at a site that is both historically and biblically justified—that changes the entire conversation. Then the scenario of coexistence emerges: not either the Dome of the Rock or the temple, but both—each in its own place.

This idea is no longer discussed solely in alternative circles, but is increasingly appearing in interviews, lectures, and opinion pieces within Israel itself.

increasingly a serious option

All things considered—the archaeological developments at the Gihon Spring, the growing attention to the City of David, shifts within the Jewish world, and the changing geopolitical reality – make it clear that the idea of a temple next to the current Haram al-Sharif can no longer be dismissed as mere speculation. What in 2020 was still regarded as an alternative hypothesis is developing into a serious option that is being increasingly researched and discussed.

The question is not if this matter will return to Israel’s agenda, but when it will happen. And who knows how soon. What is certain is that the construction of this third temple will mark a dramatic turning point in the history of the Middle East—and of Jerusalem in particular.

Delen: