Jesus Puzzle: Chapter 19

Chapter 19 Critiqued:

Doherty briefly discusses the relevance of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem to the dating of the Gospels. Doherty specifically discusses the significance of the Temple’s destruction for dating Mark’s Gospel. Doherty wrote:

“Such estimates are based almost entirely on Mark’s apocalyptic content, particularly the so-called Little Apocalypse in chapter 13. There Jesus tells his disciples that of the great Temple buildings they are marveling over, not one stone will be left standing on another. Biblical literalists have no trouble envisioning Jesus as possessing true powers of prophecy and forecasting such a thing ahead of time. But the more sober-minded judge that this sentiment did not originate with a Jesus. Rather, it reflects Mark’s knowledge of the fact that the Templehad been thrown down at the climax of the Jewish War (66-70). Or it suggests that Mark wrote shortly after the war’s onset, and he did not need to be clairvoyant to see that Romans would prevail and punish the Jews by destroying their Temple” (TJP:193-194).
Doherty continued: “The most serious problem with the pre-70 scenario is that chapter 13 as a whole suggests that its author is allowing for the passage of a certain amount of time after the war before the End finally arrives. But it is unlikely that anyone of Mark’s mindset, witnessing in the year 67 or 68 the build-up to the approaching cataclysm, or the disintegration of the Jewish situation as the Romans invaded Palestine and encircled the city, would not have been caught up in the drama of the moment and been convinced that the End, with the arrival of the Son of Man, was just around the corner. There would have been no motive or impulse to postulate any further delay” (TJP:194).

First, Doherty wrote: “Biblical literalists have no trouble envisioning Jesus as possessing true powers of prophecy and forecasting such a thing ahead of time. But the more sober-minded judge that this sentiment did not originate with a Jesus” (TJP:193-194).

John A.T. Robinson wrote: “We need not stop to wrestle with the complex question of how much goes back to Jesus and how much is the creation of the community. That Jesus could have predicted the doom of Jerusalem and its sanctuary is no more inherently improbable than that another Jesus, the son of Ananias, should have done so in the autumn of 62” (RNT:15).

Bart D. Ehrman wrote: “We know with relative certainty that Jesus predicted that the Temple was soon to be destroyed by God. Predictions of this sort are contextually credible given what we have learned about other prophets in the days of Jesus. Jesus’ own predictions are independently attested in a wide range of sources (cf. Mark 13:1, 14:58; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Moreover, it is virtually certain that some days before his death Jesus entered the Temple, overturned some of the tables that were set up inside, and generally caused a disturbance. The account is multiply attested (Mark 11 and John 2) and it is consistent with the predictions scattered throughout the tradition about the coming destruction of the Temple” (TNT:256).