Having just read The Secrets of Solomons Temple I am left with a large gaping hole of doubt about the authors stretch of facts in order to fit his hypothesis.
In Particular, and the mathematics notwithstanding, Gest alleges that King Solomon by name did not exist. Instead it was a "King Jedidiah" that built Solomons temple. Complete hogwash as I shall demonstrate
Gests hypothesis: SOLOMONS TEMPLE DEDICATED TO THE ROMAN SUN GOD SOL + THE EGYPTIAN MOON GOD AMON. HENCE SOL AMON = SOLOMON
Gests hypothesis is that the temple of Solomon was actually dedicated to the pagan worship of the sun god named SOL and the moon god named AMUN (AMON) hence SOL -AMON. SOL being the Roman Sun god and Amon was the supreme Egyptian god whom Gest misguidedly refers to as the moon god (a minor deity).
Gest alleges that someone called "King Jedediah", became known by the name of SOLOMON by his association with the Temple that he allegedly built to the Sun and the Moon! SOL - AMON, and then everyone somehow forgot his real name (Jedidiah)and he was therefater called SOLOMON. So according to Gest there was no actual King Solomon by that name!
Without delving into the Biblical "inaccuracy" postulated by Gest that the Israelite's did not know or record the real name of their own beloved king Solomon the son of king David, consider these facts.
1. King Solomon reigned approximately 967 BC
2. Rome was founded as a small village in Central Italy in about 753 BC. It took hundreds of years for Rome to become a power even in its own back yard.
3. Rome Conquered Israel (Judea) in 63BC
4. Therefore Solomon ruled 200 years BEFORE Rome existed as a small settlement in Italy and Solomon ruled 900 years before the Roman conquest of Israel nearly a millennium later.
This is an important fact. It would have been impossible to name the Temple SOL - AMON given that:
1. SOL was a Roman god. This would assume that the Temple was named after a Roman god BEFORE the very existence of Rome itself.
2. Amon (Amun) was NOT the moon god of the Egyptians as Gest alleges.
3. The moon god of the Egyptians is named Khonsu a relatively minor deity. In Egyptian mythology Khonsu is the son of Amun, the Supreme god, and the mother goddess Mut.
4. Amon was therefore the supreme god of the Egyptians and he is not to confused with his son, the moon god, Khonsu.
It is inconceivable that the ancient Israelite's - or anyone else at that time - would co-mingle two deities (Representing the SUN and the MOON) from two different cultures to refer to a Hebrew temple. One deity for the sun god SOL who did not even exist at that time, and the other deity, AMUN who was not the moon deity.
And following on this false assumption Gest proceeds to juxtapose that odd name, SOL-AMUN on the King of Israel who was the most famous King of all time for the Hebrews!
One must consider that even if the Temple was a temple dedicated to the sun and the moon, that the god Amon was NOT the moon god!
Gests own hypothesis, that the name SOLOMON is a blend of Sun and Moon, is completely destroyed by the fact that Amon is not the moon god, Khonsu is.
If Gest were to be true to his hypothesis, the Temple would be called the Temple of SOL - KHONSU.
Sol - Khonsu however, cannot be related back to the name "SOL - AMON" (SOLOMON). Gest wants to prove that the temple was dedicated to SOL AMUN which in turn lent its name to King SOLOMON.
The name SOL- KHONSU would blow his entire hypothesis out of the water. But that is what it would need to be, if Gest was reporting accurately.
That the Temple is dedicated to the sun and the moon and that King Solomon did not exit simply is fabricated.
This minor fact is a square peg in a round hole that Gest overlooks.
Gest does not let facts stand in his way.
The fact of the mis-named deities is conveniently overlooked by Gest, to further his unworkable hypothesis.
Many a reader perhaps may not immediately realize this fakery.
What else if faked?
WHAT WAS SOLOMONS REAL NAME?
It is well known that Jesus Christ was NOT Jesus' real name, he was Yoshua, a very common Hebrew name. That is his real name. Jesus is a Greek modification as is the addition of Kristos or Christ.
Anyone in Jesus time would have had no idea who Jesus Christ was. Jesus Christ is not Hebrew and they are not Hebrew words.
Mashiach is the Hebrew word for Messiah. So the Hebrew name of Jesus would in his time have been Yoshua ben Yosef (Joshua son of Joseph).
There were literally thousands of people with the name Yoshua ben Yosef. That name is like John Smith in our culture.
So you might want to be more specific by saying his profession - the carpenter from Bethlehem or some such further means of distinction.
If you wanted to append a description to his name, although there is no evidence that this was used in his lifetime, one might have referred to Jesus as Yoshua ben Yosef Ha'Moshiach - Joshua, son of Josph, the Messiah.
That being said, how would the ancient Hebrews have referred to King Solomon?
Most certainly by his HEBREW name. Shlomo ben David Ha'Melech.
The real name of Solomon is SHLOMO son of David, the king. Or simply Shlomo Ha' Melech which is King Solomon.
The Hebrew Bible has NEVER used the name of SOLOMON or SOL -AMON anywhere. Such a name does not exist in the Bible nor was used by the Hebrews.
Indeed the Israelites did not call it SHOLOMO'S temple either.
King Solomons name was never attached to the Temple! Even today Hebrew speaking people do not call it Solomons Temple.
The true Hebrew name for the Temple is Beit Ha'Mikdash (Beit = House, Ha = the, and Mikdash = Sanctification) or "The Sanctified House"
It is indeed impossible for the Temple or King SHLOMO to ever have been referred to as SOLOMON and Solomons Temple.
Therefore given this very glaring error in the premise of the book, once must clearly question what other "facts" have been bent to fit Gests hypothesis?