The most cataclysmic event from the first century for Judeo-Palestine was the First Roman-Jewish War (aka “the Great Revolt”), which lasted from 66 to 73 AD. One of the tragic instances of this war was the destruction of Herod’s Temple in 70 AD.In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus appears to predict the Temple’s destruction. In Mark’s Gospel, for example, Jesus is recorded as saying from the Temple structure: “Do you see these great buildings? Not just one stone will be left upon another, that shall not be thrown down” (Mark 13:2 NKJV). Scholars almost universally agree this can be a mention of the the Roman destruction of the Temple. The question is: Did Jesus prophecy this or was the account of this “prophecy” written after the event itself?Liberal and non-Christian scholars almost unanimously fall within the non-prophecy camp. They think that the Gospels needed to be written following the destruction of the Temple. They don’t even consider the possibility that Jesus may, actually, have made the prediction before the Temple’s demise – which the Gospels were written as well as in circulation before the event. Conservative, evangelical scholars of course have no problem accepting Jesus’ ability to make such a prophecy.Accepting the idea that accurate prophecy is possible puts us, obviously, in the area of miracles. Are miracles possible? Can a rational, enlightened person seriously entertain the possibility of Jesus turning water into wine or feeding five thousand individuals with a few loaves and fishes? Otherwise, then such a person is also unlikely to think about the possibility that Jesus accurately predicted Jerusalem’s demise. More probably, the “prophecy” was added later to enhance the Gospels’ case that Jesus was divine.Philosopher Winfried Corduan explains this anti-supernatural bias is seriously flawed, especially when you are looking at examining the life span of Jesus. “What we read within the Gospels are apparent physical impossibilities, but…we makes it possible for of these as long as we have evidence that they might be the work of God who’s liberated to supersede His created laws,” writes Corduan. Quite simply, if God is real, He is able to certainly work miracles. If Jesus was the Son of God, then surely, He could have performed miracles and made accurate prophecies.This author would like to claim that the destruction of the Temple should not, in and of itself, constitute the groundwork for dating the Gospels. After all, a Christian claiming the Temple prophecy Cheap Ugg Boots proves Jesus’ divinity would probably be accused of “begging the question” by non-Christian scholars. If that’s true, then your non-Christian should not assume the prophecy to become written in afterwards, for this kind of assumption is based on a premature judgment at best and impudent prejudice at worst.Using Acts up to now the Synoptic GospelsIf one sets aside anti-supernaturalism like a bias, the remaining evidence is fairly strong the Synoptics were written much nearer to the life span of Jesus than most liberal scholars give them credit.Take the Gospel of Luke. If the author of Luke and the author of Acts were one and the same, then Acts was probably written during the early 60s AD. Why? First, Acts makes simply no mention of the the First Jewish-Roman War (which began within the late 60s AD). This really is puzzling when you consider that Acts is really a record of early church history. It might be rather odd to omit such a significant event. It might be like a modern US history textbook not mentioning September 11, 2001. One would conclude the book was probably written and published just before that date.Additionally, Acts Ugg Boots Sale doesn’t mention the martyrdom of Paul or Peter. This is significant for two reasons. One, it does mention the death of James (Acts 12). Surely, the writer of Acts regarded Paul and Peter around James. The answer to that’s “Of course, he did.” This really is clear because Peter dominates the very first several chapters of Acts, and Paul the rest of the book. Paul’s troubles using the law are well-documented in Acts, which is absolutely unthinkable that his martyrdom would be skipped. The ONLY logical explanation is the fact that Acts was written before Paul was put to death. Scholars universally agree that Paul was martyred in Rome throughout the 60s AD – some say as soon as 62 or 63, others place it at 67 or 68.The best answer supplied by liberal scholars to the incompleteness of Luke-Acts (incomplete in terms of its failure to reference the destruction of Jerusalem and also Ugg Boots Clearance the deaths of Peter and Paul) is that the author died before he could complete it. This theory of Luke’s premature death is intriguing, except there’s no evidence for this in early church tradition. If, in fact, Luke died during the composition of his work, it would seem highly likely that a minumum of one of the early church fathers would have mentioned this fact. Keep in mind that early Christian correspondence, from such luminaries as Papias, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Clement, etc., is FULL of references to the apostles, the Gospels, and the other New Testament works. The lack of any mention of the Luke’s premature death – particularly one that supposedly happened during the composition of the canonized book! – stands like a serious refutation to this theory.Since Luke follows the composition of Mark (and in all likelihood Matthew) and precedes those of Acts, this article concludes that three from the Synoptic Gospels can be dated between your mid-30s and also the late 60s AD – well within an era of Jesus of Nazareth. Therefore, Jesus did, in fact, prophecy the destruction of the Jewish Temple.*********SOURCES include:Is the New Testament Reliable? By Paul BarnettNo Doubt About it: The Case for Christianity by Winfried Corduan”The Gospel of Luke” according to Wikipedia” When Was the Gospel of Luke Written?” according to HarvardHouse
Enoch Hurtado