Difference between revisions of "Date of the Gospel of Mark"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(With nonsensical liberal style, liberals have long asserted that the Gospel of Mark was written around the time of the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem.) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The '''Date of the Gospel of Mark''' is unjustifiably pegged to the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, based very loosely on the eschatological, end-of-the-world talk in {{bibleref|Mark|13}}. | The '''Date of the Gospel of Mark''' is unjustifiably pegged to the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, based very loosely on the eschatological, end-of-the-world talk in {{bibleref|Mark|13}}. | ||
| − | In fact, at least five considerations point to a date soon after the [[Resurrection]]: | + | In fact, at least five considerations point to a date soon after the [[Resurrection]], or even prior to it in the form of a diary kept during the events: |
*the [[Gospel of Mark]] omits subsequent events after the Resurrection; | *the [[Gospel of Mark]] omits subsequent events after the Resurrection; | ||
*the Gospel of Mark contains remarkable detail that would fade if written long afterwards; | *the Gospel of Mark contains remarkable detail that would fade if written long afterwards; | ||
*the Gospel of Mark is concise and to-the-point, while a later work would be less terse; | *the Gospel of Mark is concise and to-the-point, while a later work would be less terse; | ||
| − | *the [[Gospel of Matthew]] and the [[Gospel of Luke]], both written within decades of [[Jesus]]'s ministry, copied extensively and independently from the Gospel of Mark which must therefore had been available far earlier; and | + | *the [[Gospel of Matthew]] and the [[Gospel of Luke]], both written within decades of [[Jesus]]'s ministry, copied extensively and independently from the Gospel of Mark which must therefore had been available far earlier; |
| + | *the availability of [[scribe]]s made it possible, even likely, that a disciple of [[Jesus]] dictated regularly to a scribe as the events unfolded; and | ||
*the Gospel of Mark is by an [[Mark the eyewitness|eyewitness]], many of who were killed or scattered by years later. | *the Gospel of Mark is by an [[Mark the eyewitness|eyewitness]], many of who were killed or scattered by years later. | ||
== Nonsensical Liberal Theories == | == Nonsensical Liberal Theories == | ||
Revision as of 05:27, June 10, 2025
The Date of the Gospel of Mark is unjustifiably pegged to the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70, based very loosely on the eschatological, end-of-the-world talk in Mark 13 .
In fact, at least five considerations point to a date soon after the Resurrection, or even prior to it in the form of a diary kept during the events:
- the Gospel of Mark omits subsequent events after the Resurrection;
- the Gospel of Mark contains remarkable detail that would fade if written long afterwards;
- the Gospel of Mark is concise and to-the-point, while a later work would be less terse;
- the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke, both written within decades of Jesus's ministry, copied extensively and independently from the Gospel of Mark which must therefore had been available far earlier;
- the availability of scribes made it possible, even likely, that a disciple of Jesus dictated regularly to a scribe as the events unfolded; and
- the Gospel of Mark is by an eyewitness, many of who were killed or scattered by years later.
Nonsensical Liberal Theories
With nonsensical liberal style, liberals have long asserted that the Gospel of Mark was written around the time of the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. But Mark, a Roman name for a Gentile, showed no interest in politics, Hebrew culture, conflicts with the Roman Empire, or the Old Testament as being consummated by Jesus. Nothing about Mark suggests that he would was have been part of the armed conflicts around Jerusalem that included the fall of the Second Temple in AD 70.
| |||||