This [Addendum: and other arguments from other scholars below] fully refutes Shabir Ally’s argument that Mark was written in 70 AD (following liberal scholars) below in his debate with Dr. White. The only reason liberals date Mark at 70 AD or later is because they don’t believe in supernatural prophesy. They don’t believe that in 30 AD, a week before He is crucified, Jesus actually prophesied of the destruction of the temple, and it actually came true and happened in 70 AD, about 40 years later.
“In sum, Mark should be dated before the production of Luke’s gospel which we date no later than 62 CE. Sometime in the mid-50s is most probable.”
Addendum: Other scholars for early dating of Mark:
John Wenham, in his book, Redating Matthew, Mark and Luke, puts the Gospel of Mark at 45 AD.
John A. T. Robinson, put the Gospel of Mark also at 45 AD, and makes the case for all of the NT being written before 70 AD, in his famous book, Redating the New Testament.
F. F. Bruce, puts the Gospel of Mark in AD 64, which is still way before 70 AD and before even the break out of the war of the Romans vs. the Jews, that started in 66 AD by Nero.
“As for the earliest of our Gospels, Mark, if it is a Roman Gospel (as I think), the crisis of A.D. 64 might have provided a suitable occasion for its publication. But my Manchester predecessor, T. W. Manson, was willing to push it back into the 50s, considering that a suitable occasion for its publication might have been the reconstitution of the church in Rome about A.D. 55, after its dispersion when Claudius banished the Roman Jews about A.D. 49.” (“On Dating the New Testament”, Eternity 23 (June 1972): 32-33. (bolding my emphasis)