RRK

Can someone explain in detail the wide consensus that Mark was written sometime between A.D. 68-73? As far as I can tell, these are the main arguments for:

• Allusions to the Jewish war, and consequent destruction of the Temple are made (and weren't necessarily made in detail, since knowledge of the destruction of the Temple wasn't generally known outside of Palestine)
• It would take at least that long for such a developed Greek tradition to come into existence
• Papias' comments would seem to indicate that it was written shortly before or after Peter's death
• The use of kuliein (to roll), suggesting a circular or cylindrical tombstone like those common after the Jewish War

And the arguments against:

• The allusions made to the destruction of the Temple might actually be true prophecy, or might have been an informed prediction (i.e., it was realized beforehand that the Jews and Romans were heading inevitably towards a conflict, c.f. Joseph Smith's Civil War predictions)
• Mark contains no specific, detailed accounts of the Jewish War. Even if Mark had been written outside of Palestine, a Christian Jew (if Mark was one) would probably have some knowledge of the destruction of the Temple

Am I missing anything? Why are the arguments against considered unconvincing?

[Edited to add one more the first list]

doubtingthomas

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it was Irenaeus who said that it was written after Peter and Paul had departed(died). Anyways, that statement seems to be the strongest evidence for dating it in the late 60's.

I think that using Jesus' "prophecy" of the destruction of the temple as evidence for dating Mark is an excercise in futility. There's no way of proving if He said those things, or if they were put into his mouth after the fact. So you really can't use it as an indicator one way or the other.

Javaman

RRK, have a read through the informational section at Peter Kirby's site about The Gospel of Mark. Plus there are loads of links to more info on that page. Enjoy.

Toto

There is a currently ongoing discussion on the Jesus Mysteries yahoogroup on whether Mark should be dated to 135 CE.

The case for a late dating of Mark rests on the phrase 'abomination which causes desolation,' which is alleged to refer to Antiochos IV putting an image on the altar in the
temple, turning it into a temple of Zeus. This happened in 135, when Hadrian had a temple of Jupiter erected on the site of the Temple after the Bar Kochba revolt.

If you have access to the list, start at this message.

This article would be helpful, but is not online: Detering, Hermann "The Synoptic Apocalypse (Mark 13/par): A Document from the Time of Bar Kochba" JHC 7/2 (Fall, 2000), 161-210.