E-mail address to contact Admin direct is admin@religionethics followed by .co.uk.
Recent Posts
But you are simply describing the narrative style of the gospels - effectively narrating the claimed story of Jesus as if it is contemporaneous (i.e in the present) when we know that they were written at best decades later and, in reality, discussing something in the past.I really can't imagine how it would help an author who wants to persuade his readers to reject Judaism and embrace Christianity, to create the narrative that the Jews have recently been punished for rejecting Jesus, yet pretend that it hasn't yet happened.
So, of course, Matthew needs to allude to the destruction rather than simply say 'hey look what happened 5 years ago in CE70'. But also prophesying is a highly risky game unless you are writing with hindsight - in other words the thing you are prophesying has already happened, which is, of course, what Matthew is doing. Knowing full well that the destruction has happened but writing as if it is some kind of prophetic future event.
So basically what Matthew is doing is creating a narrative as follows: 'Judas rejected and betrayed Jesus and look what happened to him - he was punished and cursed. And now the whole of the jewish people are rejecting Jesus and so they will be punished and cursed' - knowing full well that this had already come to pass through the destruction and the narrative that the early church were creating around that event.
So yes, it only really makes sense if written after the destruction (as basically all serious bible scholars agree).
And I come back to my other point - the earliest actual texts we have on field of blood or prophecy of destruction are from way, way later than CE70 so even if there was some text earlier than the destruction there was plenty of opportunity for this to be revised to take account of the destruction and the purported fulfilled prophecy (actually merely fitting a prophetic narrative to an event that had already happened).
For various reasons, we have a soft spot for Grimsby and found the result most gratifying. That it was Man Utd they beat made it even more pleasurable.
More on this from The Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/aug/28/the-guardian-view-on-reform-uk-v-the-nottingham-post-a-councils-boycott-of-its-local-paper-is-both-petty-and-alarming
It appears to me that it is straight out of Trump's playbook. Sideline and ridicule any real scrutiny to further your own disinformation and to cover your own lack of knowledge.
