... on Synoptics Written Before 70 AD : with some debate with Ludwig Nijholt

Q

Is there evidence to suggest that the gospels were dated earlier than 70 AD, with the exception of John?
https://www.quora.com/Is-there-evidence-to-suggest-that-the-gospels-were-dated-earlier-than-70-AD-with-the-exception-of-John

Own answer

with some debate

Hans-Georg Lundahl

History buff since childhood. CSL & Eco added to Medieval lore. + Classics.

Answered Apr 25

Upvoted by Alex Pismenny

• 1. The tradition of the Church says so.
  
  
• 2. Idea of Gospels being later (except for St John, where tradition of the Church says it is later) is based on the atheistic idea that Jesus could not have predicted fall of Jerusalem and destruction of Temple.
  
  
• 3. Internal evidence shows a discrepancy between Synoptics and John, since in Synoptics, Jews is not used as a word for the enemies of Jesus, in St John’s Gospel it is always so used by narrator, and includes two examples in which Jesus used it so, during the Passion narrative, while also including several earlier examples in which He did not use it so.
  
  This seems to indicate there was a major change in relations between Jews and Christians between writings of Synoptics and writing of St John’s Gospel.

Ludwig Nijholt

A remarkably nonsensical answer. Atheism has little to do with biblical scholarship.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I wonder if you captured the nuance between “atheism” (i e systematic such) and “atheistic idea” (i e a modernist protestant getting syncretistic with such).

Modernist Protestantism is very much involved with Biblical scholarship and also very hollowed out as compared with Catholic Tradition or with Evangelicals, by precisely atheistic ideas, i e ideas which make more sense on presumption of deism, very materialistic versions of pantheism and of course atheism, than in the precise context of a man professing to be a Christian.

Ludwig Nijholt

I rest my case. I suggest you look up the meaning of atheism some time.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I suggest you check out on ideas being consistent with professed system of ideas of one vs being consistent with one system really incompatible with it.

In other words, a Modernist Protestant professes to be a Christian, but picks up a lot of ideas from atheism.

Or does your definition of atheism NOT involve “miraculous foreknowledge of future events and expressing these in words recorded before events does not occur?”

Would your own definition of mainstream Christianity NOT involve us thinking rather “miraculous foreknowledge of future events and expressing these in words recorded before events does occur?”