378 Gonzalo Rojas-Flores Holy Priest of the future Kingdom (1,6;20,6), specially concerned with the rules of ritual pureness (3,4-5; 14,4; 21,8.27; 22,11.14-15), one of the 144.000 saved ones of the Twelve Tribes of Israel (7,4-8; 14,1-5; 21,12). After the year 70, this silence would be inexplicable in terms of scriptural exegesis, because the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple was prophesied by the synoptic gospels (11) following the tradition from Micah and Jeremiah (12). Under the influence of Daniel (13), the destruction of Jerusalem was linked to the profanation of its Sanctuary (14). But John contradicts this prophetic tradition by affirming in one of his prophecies that the believers are inside the Sanctuary and that the exterior court has been taken by the gentiles, who will trample on the Holy City for 42 months (Rev 11,1-2). The Temple, in consequence, is still standing. Moreover, John prophesies that a tenth part of Jerusalem will be destroyed by an earthquake (11,13). It is clear that when John wrote his prophecy, Jerusalem and his Temple had not been destroyed yet. Therefore, Revelation must have been redacted before the year 70 (15). It is not strange that John had contradicted the synoptic tradition, since in the beginning there were two antagonistic positions in the Community of Jerusalem in respect of the Temple. It is necessary to recall the great persecution against the Community in the year 36. Everything began with the execution — or lynching — of Stephen (Acts 6,8–7,60) in the context of a revolt which was started among the Hellenist Jews, specially those from the Synagogue of the Freedmen (6,9.12). Then, a wave of arrests was ordered by the religious authorities: “with authority received from the chief priests (26,10; cf. 22,4-5), Saul was ravaging the church by entering house after house; dragging off both men and women, he committed them to prison” (11) Mark 13,1-2; Matt 24,1-2; Luke 21,5-6. (12) Mic 3,12 (cf. Jer 26,18); Jer 7,12-15. (13) Dan 9,27; 11,31; 12,11. (14) Mark 13,14; Matt 24,15. Cf. Luke 21,20. (15) During the nineteenth century the following supported this position: F. BLEEK, An Introduction to the New Testament (Edinburgh 21870) II, 226; MACDONALD, The Life and Writings of St. John, 159; F. DÜSTERDIECK, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Revelation of John (New York 31886) 46-47; B. WEISS, A Manual of Introduction to the New Testament (New York 1889) II, 82. In the twentieth century: TORREY, The Apocalypse, 87; ROBINSON, Redating, 240- 242; GENTRY, Before, 165-192; WILSON, “The Problem”, 604.