Again, we see erroneous claims made by Ehrman. The Mark 11 Temple incident is not really corroborated in John 2.bskeptic wrote:
Can anyone quote/reference scholars that comment on the historicity of these predictions? Do they really go back to Jesus? Why would Jesus give a prediction of the temple's destruction?
Also, I'm interested in any possible non-supernatural explanations for the reported predictions. (e.g. they were created after the event actually happened.)
Quote: Bart D. Ehrman wrote: “We know with relative certainty that Jesus predicted that the Temple was soon to be destroyed by God. Predictions of this sort are contextually credible given what we have learned about other prophets in the days of Jesus. Jesus’ own predictions are independently attested in a wide range of sources (cf. Mark 13:1, 14:58; John 2:19; Acts 6:14). Moreover, it is virtually certain that some days before his death Jesus entered the Temple, overturned some of the tables that were set up inside, and generally caused a disturbance. The account is multiply attested (Mark 11 and John 2) and it is consistent with the predictions scattered throughout the tradition about the coming destruction of the Temple”
(Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. Third Edition. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.)
How in the world can Ehrman state that "it is virtually certain that some days before his death Jesus entered the Temple, overturned some of the tables that were set up inside, and generally caused a disturbance. The account is multiply attested (Mark 11 and John 2)....."?
The Temple incident in gJohn did not happen days before Jesus' death.
In gJohn 2 the supposed Temple incident happened at least 3 years before the story of the resurrection.
Essentially, gJohn 2 contradicts Mark 11.
It is extremely disturbing to me that Ehrman will pass off a contradiction as multiple attestation when it is the very same Ehrman who admitted that the NT is riddled with historical problems.