Changes

no edit summary
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}}. Also, [[liberal logic]] for the [[Bible]] is that when a work is known to have been composed before a certain event, as in the Temple's destruction in AD 70, then [[liberal]]s say that is when the work was written to assign as late a date as possible.
 
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}}. Also, [[liberal logic]] for the [[Bible]] is that when a work is known to have been composed before a certain event, as in the Temple's destruction in AD 70, then [[liberal]]s say that is when the work was written to assign as late a date as possible.
 +
 +
Honest biblical scholars are not as well-versed in the trickery of [[liberal style]] and, as a result, absurd claims about a late date of writing of the Gospel of Mark become widely repeated.
    
In fact, at least five considerations point to a date of authorship of the [[Gospel of Mark]] to be soon after the [[Resurrection]], or even prior to it in the form of a diary kept during the events:
 
In fact, at least five considerations point to a date of authorship of the [[Gospel of Mark]] to be soon after the [[Resurrection]], or even prior to it in the form of a diary kept during the events:
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,506

edits