Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[Amarok]

Most scholars believe that Mark was written by a second-generation Christian, around or shortly after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple in year 70.

The problem there is that "most scholars" grasp onto 70 because they are smart enough not to put any credence in the absurd concept of "prophecy."  This is designed to make them seem less stupid than the three shits who think that miracles are real in this thread.  The problem is whoever wrote what later came to be called the gospel of mark did not address the situation in 70.  Josephus recounts that the city was a burned out, sacked, pillaged, un populated shithole.  But it was not leveled.  In Mark 13 he has his godboy say that not one stone will remain upon another.  So 70 is the terminus a quo, the earliest possible date for the city being burned out by Titus' assault.  But that condition remained valid for 65 years.  In 135 Emperor Hadrian did, in fact, level the site and build the new city of Aelia Capitolina on the site of the former Jerusalem. 

So "mark" is recording an actual historical event.  Jerusalem was in fact leveled.  But you will wait a long time for any xtian shitwit to admit that their gospel bullshit did not begin ( and remember that 'mark' was first ) until after the Romans suppressed the bar Kokhba revolt.

I suppose they could suggest that mark was too fucking stupid to understand the difference between a burned-out set of ruins and a leveled site suitable for reconstruction.  I can't see them rushing to that, either.

But But prophecies and pixie dust . Fuck all that real evidence  they believe in magic .