Clouseau

Why would anyone guess at that?

More likely; but then current trends were, from the Christian pov, all in the control of God, the Romans being the tool of God, as many nations had been previously. It is still pro-Christian evidence that anti-Christians would prefer to suppress, and within a few decades of the ministry of the person called Christ, who was then 'turning the world upside down'. There can have been few Jews and indeed others who did not wonder if there was a connexion. There may indeed be a causal connexion between the Jews' rejection of their Messiah and the end of their now obsolete temple, and, eventually, of their existence as a nation. And no doubt Jewish scholars would find that notion an unwelcome one, also.

It could contribute, and no doubt has done so, the majority of people not bothering to read scholars.

We do?

I think we do, these events quite often nothing to do with religion. Premonitions etc. are naturally not subject to scientific investigation, though. And of course, it cannot be argued that this was just not just one prophecy of many in the Bible. No-one can say that Jesus did not know that a tax-collector was in a tree, for instance.

That's circular. Records could have been made on the very same days that prophecies were fulfilled, and almost certainly were, by someone.

That does not mean that the stone used for Jesus' tomb was not circular. The fact that people seem to miss is that a mere carpenter got to be buried, not in a shallow, accessible grave, but in a carved tomb that could be, and was, sealed and guarded.

Toto

The Jews also believed this. All ancient people thought that their gods controlled things.

Who? Jesus? He didn't turn the world upside down, or there wouldn't be so many debates over whether he existed.

Since it makes no sense, and appears to be connected to anti-Semitism more than any understanding of history.

Naturally? But they are investigated, and Randi will pay you a million dollars if you can demonstrate any supernatural ability under controlled conditions. If you want to pursue this, we have an entire forum devoted to Science and Skepticism.

PaulK

There are hints in the Gospels that suggest that Jesus claimed that he would destroy the Temple himself.

Personally I would date Mark to the actual time of the Jewish War and Luke to well after. Luke's version of the Olivet Discourse (Luke 21) is significantly different from that found in Mark and Matthew (Mark 13, Matthew 24) and it seems to have been rewritten to better reflect the outcome of the war - and Jesus failure to return, even though Jersualem was lost and the Temple destroyed. Matthew is a little problematic in this scheme, but it is possible that author of Matthew did not feel able to change Mark's text in this case, except in small ways.

John Kesler

Previous thread discussing this topic.

Clouseau

All the more reason to suppress the notion of prophecy by Jesus.

But the Jews in 70 CE must have noticed the success of the following of Jesus, spread, as it was, around the whole Mediterranean region and beyond; wherever, indeed, there was Jewish diaspora.

It certainly must make sense to any devoted reader of the Tanakh without any input from Gentiles.

Science is based on the behavioural constancy of matter and energy, which permits repeatable experiments. The whole point about the supernatural is that it is temporary suspension of normal behaviour. As I say, the supernatural is not susceptible to scientific measurement.

Toto

You claim they must have noticed it, but how do you know? They never wrote about it, the Roman officials only started noticing Christians around the end of the first century. There is absolutely no evidence of a widespread Christian movement around 70 CE outside of the NT.


But is it observable? Are you trying to claim that the supernatural event will not happen if a scientist tries to examine it, because his skepticism makes the supernatural too shy?

Really - there are university researchers who have been trying to discover paranormal phenomenon for decades, and have found nothing. There are skeptics groups that regularly challenge those who claim to have paranormal abilities. They've heard all the excuses.

Clouseau

If Paul is to be be believed, they noticed it very much just about everywhere he went, which was not often in Palestine.

It's not a matter of whether the supernatural is scientifically observable. It's a matter of whether it is statistically significant, which it is very unlikely to be. It's not even very appropriate to talk about science in this connexion. The question is, what did unconverted Jews think? Whether the sack of the Jerusalem Temple, just a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus, is effect from cause, nobody can categorically affirm. But to Jews, whose very existence used to be intimately bound up with both the Temple and the Promised Land, the permanent loss of both, shortly after the coming of one who claimed to be the Messiah, who had had a very significant following among ethnic Jews, must have at least given food for thought.

Toto

Paul wrote to house churches - a small group of people who met privately in a house - in seven cities. That's all.

How do you figure that the Temple was destroyed "just a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus?" And Jesus was not the only claimant to be the Messiah. This doesn't add up. Josephus is our source for what Jews thought, and he does not attribute the destruction of the Temple to the death of Jesus.

spin

Assuming conclusions. You are merely accepting uncritically texts written at times you don't know, as though they could simply be used for historical purposes. When did christianity move out of diaspora Jewish circles? For that matter, when did christianity actually reach them? Acts is not a historical source until one can make it one, just as the Satyricon is not a historical source, but it does have a clear historical "background".

So must the Jews "have noticed the success of the following of Jesus..."? This is highly contentious because all the sources were in christian hands, hands that were well known for slipping at time to time -- false Ignatian letters, false Pauline letters, gospels rewritten and updated (just look at the literary efforts of gMatthew and gLuke). The TF if partially original shows evidence of christian hands. Christians cannot be trusted as keepers of ancient reality. They have been proven to have already reworked materials. It is merely bias to ignore the Orwellian dictum of who controls the present controls the past, for christianity controlled the literary present for centuries.

You have to demonstrate conclusions, not assume them and you cannot uncritically use material whose connection with the period of interest is opaque.

There's no "must have"; there's just "I believe".


spin

Roger Pearse

Not sure why we should ignore the NT. It would seem odd for the Jews not to notice such a thing. As I'm sure you know, Tacitus tells us that Nero noticed them, and that there were lots in Rome in 64 AD. Pliny at the end of the first century tells us that there were so many in Bithynia that the temples were neglected.

But is it observable? Are you trying to claim that the supernatural event will not happen if a scientist tries to examine it, because his skepticism makes the supernatural too shy?

Really - there are university researchers who have been trying to discover paranormal phenomenon for decades, and have found nothing. There are skeptics groups that regularly challenge those who claim to have paranormal abilities. They've heard all the excuses.[/QUOTE]

This does not appear to be a response to the point made, tho.

All the best,

Roger Pearse