The argument
that most or even all of the New Testament was written before AD70 is very
compelling, when you consider that the only event bigger than the destruction
of the temple in AD 70 was the advent, death and resurrection of Christ. But that
event is more famous in retrospect than it was when it happened to most
ordinary people. On the scale of newsworthy events in the first century for the
average Roman reading their first century equivalent of The Daily Mail, or The
Daily Planet, no event was more famous than the destruction of the temple.
Nothing. It was the most famous event in Rome for at least a couple of
centuries.
In fact, once
that event happened, the Church exploded in size. Because Christians pointed to
that event and pointed to the words of Jesus which the churches were already
sharing and preaching, and said, see, told you, Jesus predicted that. This had
been an integral part of the early Church’s message since the ascension of
Jesus Christ.
Predicting
the destruction of the temple in AD33 would be like predicting the moon would
fall from the sky. No one, not a person, who did not trust Jesus would have
believed it even possible. Because even the Romans loved the temple and they
protected it. And yet it happened.
The love of
the Romans for ancient religions, including the Jewish faith, is forgotten by many
today. Many people forget that Rome originally took over Judea in relatively
friendly circumstances, and the house of Caesar had a close affinity with the
Herodians who ruled Judea in the first century. Remember the Jewish faith had
favoured status as a religion in first century Rome. In fact, in Josephus it is
even recorded that Titus tried to stop the fire that destroyed the temple. This
might have been propaganda, but even if it was, this still proves that the
Romans did not want to be held responsible for destroying such an ancient
symbol of worship.
Christians
would tell people that this is what happens to those who ignore Jesus' words
and people were convinced in large numbers, because they were already aware
that the church was teaching this would happen. It is predicted in Matthew,
Mark and Luke, and arguably in Revelation as well.
That is a
very compelling argument that the New Testament was written very early. I have
long resisted the idea of Revelation being written before AD 90. But the
evidence is increasing that it was, because it teaches the destruction of
Jerusalem in cryptic rather than explicit terms. In the 90's it was not even
controversial to talk about the subject. But in the 50's and 60's Christianity
was still a relatively small group of people being hunted by the Pharisees and
their cronies, who had more power and influence in ancient Rome than many
people realize, as well.
Compare this
to how prophecy is handled today. Many people take ancient fulfilled prophecies
and then tie them artificially to modern events and make outrageous claims that
come crashing down. Just a few months ago I saw people claiming that Israel’s
strikes on Iran were the beginning of the liberation of Christianity in Iran. I
was shocked that people were saying this and saying it seriously. Of course,
nothing of the kind of happened, but they saw all of this as part of the “prophetic
plan of God”. Right now foolish people are again putting a date on the return
of Christ in late September. Many examples could be given.
But this type
of handling of prophecy instead of gaining great momentum for the church rather
gains great mockery. Don’t get me wrong, many Christians were mocked in the
first century for believing Jesus’ message, including that the temple would be
destroyed. But at least they had the sure words of Jesus to rely on. Taking
words of his that have obviously been fulfilled and again giving them a forward
date does great damage to the fact that his words were fulfilled. It removes their power as a testimony that we can trust his predictions because they have
been shown to be correct.
We might
learn more from the church of the past in showing how the Son of God's word was
fulfilled in the very generation he said it would be. When we approach these
passages with greater care in showing how Jesus’ message was vindicated, we
place our teaching on much firmer ground. When we argue that we have some kind
of secret prophetic code for understanding conflicts happening in the Middle
East today, even though such predictions keep being shown to be wrong, we do
great damage to the witness of the church.
This was both informative and practical, thank you.
ReplyDelete