/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19803427]

>Jesus predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred in 70 AD
>it’s impossible to predict the future
>therefore, the Gospel of Mark must have been written in 70 AD or later
What on Earth? THIS is the power of Biblical studies? You can literally contradict all of this by just saying “Christianity is literally true.” Do they have anything more substantial dating the gospels?

[Anonymous No.19803449]

>>19803427
Yes, this makes no sense. Obviously if the destruction of Jerusalem occurred before the gospels were written, they would include the story and say "these things have been fulfilled in our time because Titus destroyed the temple" or whatever. Instead they don't mention it because they were written before 70AD.

[Anonymous No.19803451]

Well I've seen arguments that Mark was written during a time where it seemed very likely that Jerusalem was about to be destroyed or after it actually occurred, there was a war going on at the time after all
I think you'll find the kind of argument you posted in Islamic studies as well, it's pretty normal to date things like that

[Anonymous No.19803452]

I don't get why it can't just be that Jesus prophesied doom for Jerusalem and it came true coincidentally. He told the disciples to loudly prophesy doom for every town that didn't take them in, maybe what he said in Jerusalem was more of the same.

[Anonymous No.19803455]

Sounds like circular reasoning desu

[Anonymous No.19803526]

>dude, what if this city which has been conquered and razed multiple times in the past was conquered and razed again in the future
>I mean, just imagine if the massive and aggressive empire just on our doorsteps who already control us by proxy decided to move in after a rebellion to control us more directly

[Anonymous No.19803592]

>>19803449
They wouldn't have mentioned it because it was such a major event, it scarcely needed mentioning so directly. The power of prophecy is in the reader's inference, not in a bold declaration of your leader's foresight.

[Anonymous No.19803956]

>>19803592
Except when other prophecies are fulfilled in the Bible, it will explicitly say “X fulfilled Y prophecy.” Like, that’s half the verses in the Gospel of Matthew

[Anonymous No.19803971]

>>19803427
it really do be like that

[Anonymous No.19803980]

>>19803427
Yeah, in general Biblical Studies/Biblical Criticism seem to approach the Gospels, and the Bible in general, from the perspective that they aren't actually true. I've never understood why Christians take those fields seriously. The Church itself has done plenty of study of the Bible, they're the preferred source of info.

[Anonymous No.19805325]

there's several options:
>jesus accurately predicted the destruction of jerusalem 40ish years after his death because he could see the future
>OR jesus accurately predicted sack of jerusalem 40ish years after his death because he had a keen understanding of the political situation in the region
>OR jesus just guessed and got lucky
>mark accurately recorded one of the above in his gospel written before the destruction of jerusalem
>OR mark accurately recorded jesus' prediction while removing several other untrue predictions from his gospel
>OR mark fabricated the prediction, writing his gospel after the destruction of jerusalem
>OR mark fabricated the prediction, writing at some point shortly before the destruction of jerusalem when tensions were rising in the region
So you'd have to assign a probability to each possibility. You'd also have to account for other things, for instance how jesus being able to accurately predict the future doesn't prove christianity or that he was the son of god, he could have been a soothsayer posing as the son of god, or a roman agent who knew they planned to attack sooner or later.

[Anonymous No.19805358]

>>19805325
Would you read a mathematics textbook and start picking apart at it?
>1+1=2 can only be assumed to be correct if blah blah blah
Fuck off cunt.

[Anonymous No.19805528]

>>19805358
>a millenia old collection of supernatural stories should be treated just like a math textbook