Vaticinium ex eventu,
is has been argued, is “the term applied to a passage in the prophets or the
gospels which has the form of a prediction but is in fact written in the
knowledge of the event having occurred[1]”. Among the Holy Scriptures,
the book of Daniel has been one of the most discussed areas for the occurance
of vaticinium ex eventu since ancient times. Porphyry (A.D. 232–ca. 305), a
Neo-platonic philosopher assumed that there could be no predictive element in
prophecy so that the Book of Daniel could be only historical in nature, and
therefore of a late date (Bargas). Furthermore, some scholars state that there
are some vaticinium ex eventu passages in the New Testament as well. For
example, a biblical scholar J. M. Creed insisted that Luke 23:34[2] is the “prophecy from the
event” for the fulfillment of Psalm 22:18 “the soldiers casting lots for Jesus’
garments” (Creed, 287). In addition, some scholars seriously think that the
story of “the Destruction of the Temple” is one example of vaticinium ex
eventu. According to their theory, the Jesus’s prophecy was a forged fable
based on the First Jewish–Roman War (A.D. 66–73) in which Jerusalem and the
Temple were completely destroyed by Roman soldiers (Stegall). When it comes to
the New Testament, it is extremely crucial whether the destruction of the temple
is vaticinium ex eventu or not because it would immediately settle when the
Gospels were written. In other words, if this story is a prophecy from the
event, it means the Gospels were penned after the destruction of the temple
which actually occurred in A.D. 70. There have been so many heated disputes
over this issue so far. Professor Andreas J. Köstenberger, the spearhead
advocator of this accusation, asserts that John 11:47-48[3] obviously reveals that the
author of this gospel knew about the tragedy (Stegall). However, John Robinson,
an English New Testament scholar, hits back at this allegation for the reason
that “the chief priests and Pharisees did not leave Jesus “alone” to continue
doing His sign-miracles for in fact they crucified Him.” (Stegall). All in all,
the suggestions related to “Vaticinium ex eventu” in the New Testament seem to
be a lack of sufficient evidences and explanations for various questions. For
one thing, if those Gospel authors knew “the Destruction of the Temple”, why
did not they boast the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy more directly as they
usually did? (John 13:38[4], 18:17[5]). Moreover, if the Gospels
were written after the incident (A.D. 70), then why do their descriptions lack
other significant events (e.g. the abrupt ending of Acts)? Certainly, there are
so many hypotheses over this matter. However, the conclusive truth is still
unclear. Sometimes ideas that are said to be supported by majority of the
scholars are not more reliable at all in biblical criticism than the Holy Scripture
itself.
[1] Oxford Biblical
Studies Online
http://www.oxfordbiblicalstudies.com/article/opr/t94/e1988?_hi=0&_pos=7
[2] Jesus said, "Father, forgive
them, for they do not know what they are doing." And they divided up his
clothes by casting lots.
[3] Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin. “What are we accomplishing?” they asked.
“Here is this man performing many signs. If we let him go on like
this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away
both our temple and our nation.”
[4] Jesus answered, “Will you lay down your
life for me? Truly, truly, I say to you, the rooster will not crow till you
have denied me three times.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿