Talk:Antonia Fortress

message: The article leaves the impression that Josephus mentions some bridges "Josephus' description of the siege of Jerusalem suggests that it was separated from the temple enclosure itself and probably connected by two colonnades with a narrow space between them. Josephus' measurements suggest about a 600-foot separation between the two complexes" and "there are ten references in Josephus to these bridges" I was not able to find one !?--Brkic (talk) 16:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: They're called collonades. He was very profuse. The Jewish rebels set them on fire before the war broke out. 2601:194:381:7C0:31F0:B447:9522:FD14 (talk) 13:29, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What bridges ? 

message: The article leaves the impression that  gives no hint of more than one tower. In fact, in B.J. v. 238, Josephus wrote, "The general appearance of the whole was that of a tower with other towers at each of the four corners; three of these turrets were fifty cubits high, while that at the south-east angle rose to seventy cubits and so commanded a view of the whole area of the temple."
It's been so long since I've edited anything in wikipedia or made comments on a discussion page that I've forgotten how to sign a comment. I see that I should put 4 tildes, but then what? My initials in the parentheses? I'll try it. (96.245.10.33 (talk) 03:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many towers 

message: The book of Acts says that when Paul was arrested at Jerusalem he was taken into a castle.  Could it have been talking about Antonia?Leo-Isaurus-Rex (talk) 17:01, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Why should it, anon?  The legion was split up into various garrisons throughout the country - not all in a single location. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:57, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  St. Paul 

message: Cyberbot II has detected links on Antonia Fortress which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global
If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://www.bible-history.com/antonia-fortress/
*:Triggered by \bbible\-history\.com\b on the local blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:24, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on [[Antonia Fortress]] 

message: The fringe theory of the Base Institute is under discussion at WP:FTN. Zerotalk 14:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. This also fails quite simply the WP:RS test as http://www.baseinstitute.org would not qualify as a RS for history or archaeology. If one would want to add this theory - one should find a reputable book or journal article.Icewhiz (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, the history of the man behind the Base Institute, Bob Cornuke is.....colourful, to say the least..Huldra (talk) 21:50, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fringe theory 

message: No discussion of the possible location of the Second Temple or Wailing Wall being at Antonia Fortress?
This has been discussed in Academia, although a minority opinion and I wanted to know more about this...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:7F4:5081:FD00:A022:3A0E:8B33:9FE9 (talk) 10:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fringe, but if you bring a reliable source we can consider it. Zerotalk 11:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  second temple 

message: This entire article is one big lie and Wikipedia has become nothing but a bad joke for certain people to push their ridiculous mythologies in the place of actual history and archaeological facts. Every serious historian and archeologist knows that Fortress Antonia was the entire Haram al-sharif and that Herod's temple was on a platform to the south where the "City of David" is now located which was then completely destroyed. All the evidence is consistent with that. Even part of the destroyed bridge is still there to the south of Mosque and the windows of the Haram are designed and optimized for archers. That's also besides the fact that the dimensions of the Haram al-Sharif match those of most other Roman military forts and matches with the descriptions of Josephus. The list of evidences goes on... Editors/mods/whoever.. do your jobs. 69.157.142.54 (talk) 03:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the place for you Original Research and POV fringe approach. HammerFilmFan (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article