Hey everybody, Pastor Steven Anderson here from Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe,
Arizona to quickly run through with you 30 problems in the A City Lost trailer-slash-film.
Now the trailer is less than two minutes long, but it alone has six problems. So let's quickly
get into this. 22 seconds into the trailer, we have a grammatical error.
God told the Israelites, make me a sanctuary that I may dwell among them.
How can he tell the Israelites, you know, that he may dwell among them when the them
is a reference to the Israelites? He actually told Moses, make me a sanctuary that I may
dwell among them, the Israelites. All right, number two, at 55 seconds in, you
have this extremely misleading statement about, you know, could this be the temple where Solomon
was coronated? And the idea here is to snow the viewer into thinking that somehow we're
talking about the location of Solomon's temple by saying, well, you know, the temple where
Solomon was coronated. Is it possible that the temple that he discovered
is where Solomon was coronated? So the site that they're referring to, which
they call temple zero was something that supposedly existed centuries before Solomon was even
born, like way back in the distant past, like they were calling it the temple of Melchizedek
or, you know, saying that it went all the way back to like the time of Abraham or something
way before Solomon. No one is claiming that this temple would have been operational at
the time that Solomon was coronated. Because if you remember, the temple site was the threshing
floor of Ornan the Jebusite at that time. It wasn't a temple and they're claiming that
these are the same place. And so this is just super misleading and inaccurate to claim that
this temple could have been the temple in which Solomon was coronated. Solomon wasn't
coronated in a temple. Solomon built the temple years after he was coronated. There was no
temple that he was coronated in. It's just this kind of sensational statement that's
meant to be misleading. Problem number three, at one minute and five seconds into the trailer,
this archaeologist Eli Shukron has just spoken. And then they follow that up with this misleading
edit. He's either lying or he's telling the truth. And this is the place of the temple
of Solomon inherited. That makes it seem like either, you know, Eli Shukron is lying or
he's telling the truth about this being the place because then they keep showing that
guy on the screen while they're saying, you know, either he's lying or he's telling the
truth. We're in the temple. This fantastic finding because they take us to the beginning
of worshiping God. He's either lying. There is a penalty for sin the Bible tells us, or
he's telling the truth. And this is the place of the temple of Solomon and Herod. Okay.
Which leads me to problem number four with the trailer, which is that the star archaeologist
of this trailer and of the film itself vehemently disagrees with the whole premise of this film.
And here's the evidence right here. Recently, I ran into Eli in Jerusalem and ask him in
his own words to clarify this twisting of his words. So just so we know, Eli is a very,
very famous archaeologist. He's one of the most significant archaeologists in Jerusalem.
So we wanted to get him from Eli's. Again, the temple on Temple Mount period. All the
other just idea for people and you know, we're in the world, everyone can say wherever you
go, but if you go to the evidence, like all the evidence, like all the finding the temple
on Temple Mount period. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Bye. Notice how
dismissive he is of their view. He believes it's ridiculous. And this is the star archaeologist
of their film. I guess it's kind of rough to find archaeologists in your film when every
real archaeologist disagrees with the premise of the movie. Problem number five, at one minute and
23 seconds, we have Patrick Boyle saying, if we could get the location of the most important
mountain in the Bible wrong, you know, maybe we're wrong about the location of the temple. And by the
way, this line that you find in the trailer is Patrick Boyle's only line in the entire film. And
what's so ridiculous about this is saying like, Oh, we got the location of Mount Zion wrong, and
they just figured out the real Mount Zion and blah, blah, blah. Obviously, they're just labeling
some hill over there as Mount Zion, for tourists to go to. But in reality, if you study the Bible,
the word Zion, refers to a bunch of different things, right? It's not just one thing, because
sometimes, Zion is specifically referring to the city of David, a lot of times it's just referring
to Jerusalem in general, it's referring to the whole area. I mean, if you go through all the
references, it's used in a variety of ways, which is one of the reasons why the Bible talks about
the mountains of Zion, plural. So just because they put up a sign in Israel labeling something as
Mount Zion, or they used to label something else as Mount Zion, Jerusalem itself is Zion, the whole
city, the whole area could be referred to as Zion is referred to that way in the Bible. Because
again, the word Zion is used in a variety of ways in the Bible, and that's easy to demonstrate.
Problem number six, at one minute and 32 seconds, we have Robert Cornuke saying, this fulfills the
prophets, this doesn't. This fulfills the prophets, this does not. And he's pointing at a picture of
some terrorist agriculture. And he's saying this fulfills the prophets. And what he's referring to
is that there's a prophecy in the book of Micah. So it's not the prophets plural, it's one prophecy
in the book of Micah, where it says, Zion shall be plowed like a field and Jerusalem shall become
heaps. But what's funny about that is that that prophecy is literally rescinded in Jeremiah,
chapter 26. And the Bible clearly says that God actually repented and decided not to do that.
Listen to what the Bible says in Jeremiah 2618. Micah the Morassite prophesied in the days of
Hezekiah king of Judah, and spake to all the people of Judah saying, Thus saith the Lord of
hosts, Zion shall be plowed like a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of
the house as the high places of the forest. Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him at
all to death? Did he not fear the Lord and besought the Lord, and the Lord repented him
of the evil which he had pronounced against them? Thus might we procure great evil against our souls.
So just as when Jonah prophesied that Nineveh would be overthrown, and then God repented of
the evil and decided not to destroy Nineveh, that's exactly what happened with Micah's prophecy.
So for them to say, well, you know, this is a prophecy that just has to be fulfilled,
and you know, this fulfills the prophets, this doesn't, ignores the fact that we have this clear
scripture about God repenting of that evil, and not doing it. Obviously, one could make the case
that maybe these people here got it wrong. It would be kind of a weird thing to include in
the Bible, though, if they got this so wrong, when, you know, nobody's disputing it in this
passage. But aside from that, guess what? You can see pictures of a plow literally on top of
the traditional Temple Mount location, and it's a big flat area, and you can see how parts of it
have been plowed, parts of it are like a forest. So even if you wanted to take this literally about
today's Temple Mount, you still could anyway. Alright, so let's get into the film itself with
problem number seven. Eleven minutes and thirty seconds into the film, you have this giant
straw man about people claiming that the Western Wall is part of the temple, okay, which that is
not the claim that's being made. You know, a simple, quick Google search will show you
that no, people are not claiming that that is actually part of the temple, okay? The Temple
Mount has like a retaining wall around it or something, and that's obviously not part of the
temple, because nothing is left from the temple, because as Jesus said, not one stone is left upon
another, you know, when they showed him the buildings of the temple. The buildings of the temple
are gone. All you have left is just this big, flat mountain on which the temple was situated.
Then again, problem number eight, twenty-six minutes and thirty seconds in, you have this straw
man claim made again that tour guides are saying that the Western Wall is a wall of the temple.
There is no way that anyone even halfway serious believes that that is a quote,
wall of the temple. That is absurd. It's just a straw man. Point number nine is at 31 minutes and
30 seconds into the film, you have this military guy who says quote, from just a pure military
perspective, I would want to put my camp on the highest ground I could, which back then was Mount
Mariah. Now, they're talking about the Temple Mount at this point, because they're claiming
that the only thing up there was just a Roman fortress, not the temple as well. And the funny
thing about this is that the guy is calling the Temple Mount Mount Mariah. Well, guess what? The
Bible specifically says in Second Chronicles 31 that Solomon began to build the house of the Lord
at Jerusalem in Mount Mariah. So if the Temple Mount is Mount Mariah, that's specifically where
the Bible says God told him to build the temple. And so, you know, this guy in the film is calling
the Temple Mount Mount Mariah and saying, oh, yeah, the Roman fortress is built on Mount Mariah.
But then later in the film, they're going to act like Mount Mariah is somewhere else, you know,
and that the temple location is actually somewhere else in the City of David. So it's super
inconsistent. At problem number 10, at 40 minutes and 30 seconds in, the guy says that the real
temple location is actually 600 feet to the south of the Temple Mount at the Gihon Springs. And
this part just kind of blew me away like really, like is this entire film about a discrepancy of
600 feet? I mean, that just kind of blew my mind that line in the film, you know, oh, I was being
pulled south 600 feet to Gihon Springs. Wow, 600 feet, super meaningful film. Okay, and then at
48 minutes and 55 seconds, this is the quote that's made by Robert Korniuk, when David took
over the Jebusite fortress, God came to him and said, David, buy the threshing floor. Okay,
so there are actually two major problems here. Number one, when David took over the Jebusite
fortress, that is not when he bought the threshing floor. Okay, those two events are separated by
decades, number one. But then problem number 12 with the film is that no, God did not tell him
buy the threshing floor. And the entire film is like this with Robert Korniuk, just making claims
about what the Bible says that are not in the Bible, just over and over again, just what God
said, David, buy that threshing floor. Well, no, actually, he didn't. Okay. He actually just told
him to build an altar there. And then David went and offered to buy it. The guy wanted to give it
to him for free. He insists on buying it. But nowhere did God say you need to buy it. Okay.
It's just a made up statement. And he's decades off in his timeline. Problem number 13. At 51
minutes and 30 seconds, the film says, the Bible clearly states that the temple was constructed
within the limits of the Jebusite fortress. And of course, this is a statement that is made
nowhere in the Bible. And again, it's like I said, the whole movie is like this, like,
they'll show a Bible verse, like, like, for example, they show them and this isn't even
on my list, but they show the this verse about Zion being plowed like a field. And it's like,
you know, God said that it would be plowed like a field and then its location would be completely
forgotten. Or, you know, it's just it just makes statements about what you just saw that aren't
real. Okay. And for example, in this case, where it's claiming that it was within the limits of
the Jebusite fortress, which the Bible doesn't say, they have a graphic on the screen that says,
in the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite, which is true, but then they just put in
parentheses, Jebusite fortress. So, you know, threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite,
that's the Jebusite fortress. Says who? Shut up and believe it because we said so.
All right, problem number 14. At 54 minutes, this quote comes on the screen like it's some
authoritative quote. But then when you read the fine print, it's a quote from Robert Cornuke's
book. So he's literally citing himself as an authority. Just wow to that. Okay. And then
at one hour and two minutes and 30 seconds, Robert Cornuke says, quote, tradition is mentioned
14 times and it's all negative. Now, bro, did you even open a concordance? Because actually,
tradition is used 13 times and two of those mentions are positive. So this is just factually
inaccurate. There are two positive mentions of tradition, 13 total. He claims it's 14 and
they're all negative. Okay. Problem number 16. At one hour, 10 minutes and 28 seconds,
uh, the archeologist Eli Shukran says, olive oil, you must use it immediately. You cannot wait with
olive oil. Now, I don't know if this guy's just never seen the inside of a kitchen before,
but actually this is just totally false. This idea that olive oil just instantly goes bad. Now,
obviously, yeah, eventually months later or years later, olive oil is going to go bad,
but olive oil was used in the ancient world sometimes even to preserve things. Okay. Like
where they put the wine and the vats and put a layer of oil on top or whatever. And I'm like,
I'm not claiming to be an expert on food or cooking or olive oil, but I know this olive
oil doesn't have to be used immediately. It didn't then it doesn't now. Quick Google search,
talk to a few people. I don't know. Why don't you pour some olive oil out? I smashed some olives
and I don't know, but I don't know what this guy's talking about. I don't know where he got
this statement. He just makes this really strong statement with no backing. Problem number 17,
uh, one hour, 22 minutes and 30 seconds. Uh, they talk about how the temple Mount has 36 to 37
cisterns and the cisterns contain millions of gallons of water. Uh, so the temple Mount has
millions of gallons of water in the cisterns. And then later in the film, this statement is made
that there is no water on the temple Mount whatsoever. None. Now they make a big deal
about there not being running water, but there is also just by itself in the film, a statement of,
of Cornuke saying, there's no water on the temple Mount none. But then at this point,
they're telling us that there's, you know, 37 to 38 cisterns. Problem number 18 at one
hour, 23 minutes and 50 seconds. Uh, Cornuke says for the priests to wash themselves before
the priestly duties in the temple, it had to have been living water, running water, spring water.
Thus the Gihon Springs would be considered holy water. Okay. First of all, number one,
running water isn't just automatically considered holy water. Aside from this,
if you actually look up running water in scripture, there are references in the Mosaic law to
running water. It only occurs in three passages of the Mosaic law. So thousands
of scriptures about the priests and the tabernacle and the temple and all the things that they do,
all their duties and everything, thousands of references. And you only have three passages
containing seven references to running water. And none of them are what he's saying. None of them
are about the priest washing himself before doing his duty or any of the things that Cornuke claims
they have to do with, you know, cleansing, leprosy and whatever. But again, the point is,
it's something that's barely mentioned. So yeah, there are a couple rituals where you need running
water, but to claim that every priest has to, you know, be washed in running water before he can do
his job is just false. That's not what the Bible says. The Bible talks about them bathing their
flesh in water and it talks about, of course, baths and leavers and things. But no, that's just
another one of those claims that is made with no evidence. Problem number 19 at one hour, 26
minutes and nine seconds. The claim is made that the Gihon Spring is under pressure and that it's
analogous to Old Faithful in Yellowstone and that the temple is basically built at this spring
that shot out of the earth like Old Faithful, except a cold version. So I guess we could call it
Cold Faithful, you know, that the temple was built at Cold Faithful. Of course, this is not something
that the Bible teaches. It's an absurd claim, you know, to compare. And I've been to Old Faithful.
Old Faithful is super cool if you ever get a chance to go there. But you know, comparing the
Gihon Spring to Old Faithful is really laughable. Okay. Problem number 20 at 133.30, Cornuke says,
Paul told the Bereans, don't believe what I say. I'm asking you, the audience, don't believe anything
I say. And then, you know, goes on to say, you gotta check it in the Bible. Don't believe it
because I said. But again, this is just Cornuke claiming that the Bible says stuff that it
doesn't say because of course, there's no reference to Paul telling the Bereans, quote,
hey, don't believe what I say. I want to see anything like that where Paul said to the Bereans,
hey, don't believe what I say. But again, Cornuke is just constantly making things up and saying
that they're in the Bible throughout the film. Okay, problem 21 is, in my opinion, the dumbest
thing in this entire movie, which is, and I'm just going to read for you what Cornuke says
at 134.20. Psalm 48 gives us a really strong pronouncement by God. And it's a really strong
admonition that we should teach following generations where the temple was, where Zion was,
where the bulwarks are, where the palaces are, where the boundaries are. The Bible is very,
very strong about telling and people haven't done that. They haven't studied where these things
work. So Cornuke is claiming the Bible commands us to figure out where the temple was 2000 years ago
and to teach it to our kids or something. And this is preposterous, stupid, twisting of scripture.
Like I said, I think it's the dumbest thing in the whole movie. Here's what Psalm 48 12 actually
says, walk about Zion, and go round about her, tell the towers thereof, Mark ye well her
bulwarks, consider her palaces, that ye may tell it to the generation following. So he's telling
people who actually live there to walk around and just look at things that they actually see
and tell the generations following, you know, what it was like, right? So does this say,
figure out what it was like, go dig it up, you know, figure out what it was like thousands of
years ago. And you know, we Christians have been delinquent in this command or something,
as if it matters to us as Christians at all, where this temple used to be. And let's just talk about
the elephant in the room about this whole film, who even cares where the temple was located. It's
the most irrelevant subject I can even think of. But I guess we're supposed to believe that the
Jews completely all of them and not even just the Jews, just everyone else who lived in that region,
just all the millions of inhabitants of that Levant region, that everyone forgot where the
temple was actually located. Everybody ignored Psalm 48, everybody, you know, whatever. But that
we're going to get chastised with Psalm 48 for not following some weird archaeological rabbit trail.
I mean, again, it's just, I didn't want to talk about it. So dumb. Anyway, problem 22.
We have at 13540, Pastor McMurtry telling us that we as Christians should be against rebuilding the
temple, which, you know, amen. Yeah, that's true. We should be against rebuilding the temple. But
then later, Kurnuk goes on to say, once the Jews figure out the current location of the temple is
in the city of David, and they own that land, they could build a temple. This is really exciting.
If we could just get the Jews to figure this out, then they'd be able to build the temple and they
get real excited about this. So if McMurtry on the one hand is saying, hey, the temple's evil,
it's bad, we don't want to build it. And then you have Kurnuk saying, hey, if they can find out the
true location, then they can build it right away. We can start building because they already own the
land. You know, like, what is the point of this film? Are we trying to help the Antichrist? Like,
are we trying to help the Jews build a temple that the film admits is evil by explaining to them that
it really should be on a location that they already own? Like, again, just wow. Problem
number 23. At 141 30, we have Pastor McMurtry say, we believe it's during that time of great
tribulation, that God is going to pour his wrath out on this earth. Here's the funny thing about
that. Didn't we do a whole film about this Paul called after the tribulation, where we went on and
on and on proving from the Bible that the great tribulation is not the time when God's wrath is
poured out. And now here's a movie that says that we believe that during the time of the great
tribulation, God is going to pour out his wrath on the earth. Wow, I guess we've just completely
negated the entire film after the tribulation. Because of course, the Bible clearly teaches
that God's wrath is poured out after the tribulation, not during the great tribulation.
And then problem 24. At 143 25. This is the final statement of the film, the last words of the film,
you know, you really want to end on something powerful in a film like this, quote, this is
Robert Koenig speaking, the Bible is literally coming to life right before our eyes. So the film
literally ends with a bad use of the word literally. Okay, and it's hilarious when people
it's hilarious when people use the word literally this way, right? Like the Bible is like literally
coming to life for like, like, like a book is literally, you know, coming to life before it's
alive. That's what literally means. Okay. Like, I remember I heard a preacher say that the apostles
literally turned the world upside down. Right? So it was literally turned it upside down or,
you know, that the city would come in and just literally shoot down your plans or something.
And and so these uses of literally are truly laughable. Okay, and then just super fast. I got
five more just little bonus like linguistic problems like the word crucial is misspelled
in the film. They spell it CRUTIAL when it's actually CRUCIAL. They claim that Robert Kurnook
has written a compilation of 12 books. That's not what compilation means. The statement is made in
the film. People in Jerusalem are beloved of that site. That would grammatically mean that the site
loves them instead of vice versa. Here's another fun little statement from the film. These deep
walls go down from a deep height. So have fun trying to figure out what that means. And then
also we have a new verb that was invented in this film. I conjecture I conjecture and then okay, so
problem number 30. The premise of the entire film is wrong. So that's kind of a big one, isn't it?
Because in Second Chronicles chapter five, when they're finishing up building the temple,
the Bible says in verse two, that they bring up the Ark of the covenant of the Lord out of the
city of David, which is in Zion. And then a few verses later, they install it into the temple.
So notice they're taking it out of the city of David and taking it up to the temple. And so
it's impossible for the temple to be in the so called, you know, city of David that they're
claiming it is today. And so there you go, folks. 30 problems. This is not all the problems. Okay,
I'm sure that you could find way more if you wanted to. But if for some bizarre reason,
you're interested in this subject, and want to see more, there's a documentary on YouTube that
you could watch. Just look up this documentary on YouTube. It's a well made documentary that just
completely demolishes the premise of A City Lost. And I'll probably put a link in the description
as well. You know, I don't know, maybe, maybe Paul Wittenberg can watch this review and fix
these 30 problems. And then maybe five years from now, you know, we can get another version
of the film that's totally different. Anyway, God bless you have a great day.