Q source as dating post temple?

Article

1. Walsh, for example, gives reasons for seeing Q as post temple, Considering the literary interests and conventions evident in their works, I propose that the canonical gospels, and even Q, demonstrate an engagement with first century political events that place these texts after the Jewish War. These writings chronicle the teachings and life of a notable Judean figure whose wonderworking and Deuteronomistic viewpoint had particular purchase after the destruction of the Temple. Among the options for why such a creative exercise may have been necessary is that it addressed the cultural, social, and religious uncertainties left in the wake of the War and Temple destruction. In Q, for example, both Jesus and John the Baptist offer an alternative to the dominant Temple system. That is, through their teachings, each arguably exemplify what Jonathan Z. Smith refers to as “heroes-that-succeeded”—figures who managed to recognize and remain outside of the confines of an ill-fated, dominant social order. In the face of a disrupted cosmic order, writers like Q overcame a perceived ritual and social ambiguity by searching for a new center for symbolic-social meaning. By extending this line of analysis to Q and placing all of our Jesus writings after the War, we not only attend to the literary interests expressed by these authors, but we avoid the uncritical acceptance of the myth that the first-century experienced a spontaneous, cohesive, diverse and multiple Big Bang of Christian activity. This approach also respects the parameters set by available historical evidence—that is, we have no firm documentation of any material about Jesus’ life and teachings before the War, save Paul [My emphasis]