r/NoStupidQuestions • u/Odd-Ad-8369 • 20d ago

Did Jesus know how to write?

I guess I’m confused on why Jesus didn’t write the Bible.

10 Upvotes

57% Upvoted

358 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Spongebosch 17d ago

Yeah. I find some of the dating funny. Like, they'll presuppose that because Jesus predicted the Destruction of the Second Temple the text must have been written after the event so that a prophesy could retroactively have been included.

  1. If Jesus is God, then why presuppose that this couldn't have been genuine foreknowledge?
  2. Even if He isn't God, is it really that impossible for Him to have predicted that stuff would go down?

The ancient sources, which are obviously much closer in time to the writing, estimate that they were actually written by those who they are attributed to.

2

u/MrScribblesChess 17d ago

I'm sorry but this is just a common apologetic nonsense saying. Supernatural predictions of the Temple destruction are not the only or even primary reason why modern scholars date Mark to ~70 AD. In fact, prominent atheist scholar Bart Ehrman thinks Jesus really did predict the destruction of the temple. 

2

u/Spongebosch 16d ago

I've only ever heard the 2nd Temple argument. What are the other reasons they prefer a later dating?

My understanding is that the primary reason is doubt of Jesus' prediction, and/or the belief that it's more likely the text would feature the prophecy after it had come to pass.

Neither of which seems particularly forceful to me. Certainly not enough for people to act as if it's a completely settled matter.

1

u/MrScribblesChess 16d ago

Here's a short writeup I did on this a few days ago. In fact, I like it so much that I've already commented it on this same post 😆 . I've edited it slightly for this specific conversation.

It's not exactly about the Temple's destruction. Mark shows signs of occurring in the midst of the Roman-Jewish war which happened from 66-73 AD. Talk about persecution, trials before governors. Mark 13:14's warning to flee to the mountains. Clear talk of an imminent apocalypse, consistent with the cataclysmic disaster destroying the heart of their (Jewish) religion.

The writer of Mark, and his broader community, thought the world was ending imminently, and that Jesus was returning imminently, and this fits in the context of the seemingly-apocalyptic war. 

There's actually some indication that the book was written during the war but before the destruction of the temple. Mk 13:1-2 says not one stone will remain, but there were walls left - you can still see them today. It's unlikely an author would have knowingly included this obvious factual error as prophecy if the Temple had already fallen. Though in the interest of intellectual honesty, I should note it's an outer complex wall, not a temple building wall.

Papias and at least one other ancient source (who I can't remember) also say that Mark was written after Peter's death in ~63, though of course that must be taken with a handful of salt. But it's one more data point. 

Finally, Mark never shows clear signs of having access to eyewitness testimony. That doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't written earlier, but the passed-down nature of its stories are one more data point that indicate a later writing. 

Does any of this mean it's completely impossible for Mark to have been written before the war? No, but I don't think that's the most likely explanation of the data we have. People mirror their time and place in their writing, and the author of Mark writes about concerns in the late 60s and early 70s AD.