Start Dating of the gospels

Dating of the gospels

Also Christians are still referred to as “disciples” and the Jewish nation as “the people.” Sunday is called “the first day of the week,” another early expression.

(4) The second argument against an early date for Luke assumes again that Jesus did not have supernatural power to foresee the future. Prophets often predicted Jerusalem’s destruction as a sign of God’s judgment, and Jesus’ predictions may have concerned its destruction at the end of the world, not A. In the predictions, Jerusalem is destroyed by her enemies. But if the “prophecies” had been written after the event, then those peculiarities would surely have been included. That is quite significant, considering what a catastrophe the destruction of the holy city was for both Jews and Christians at that time.

And really, even on a purely humanistic account of the matter, there is no reason those predictions could not have been given before A. So really the argument from Jesus’ predictions supports a pre-70 dating of the gospels. This evidence is both compelling and authoritative, and as far as I know, has not been refuted convincingly by any reputable scholar. Luke centers much attention on the events that took place in Jerusalem, but he mentions nowhere in Acts the destruction of the city in A. A second event noticeably absent is the Roman Emperor Nero’s terrible persecution of the Christians in Rome.

In any case, it is very apparent that the arguments for a post-70 date of the gospels hang together on certain unproved assumptions. No wonder Robinson can compare the current arguments for the dating of the gospels to a line of drunks reeling arm in arm down the street. Craig’s presentation of the evidence for a pre-70 A. (a) There is no mention of events that happened between A. From the Roman historian Tacitus we learn that Nero covered the Christians with tar, crucified them, and used them as torches to light up Rome at night.