Sure. I get you. I just don't think there is a whole lot to be gained by arguing about when it was written because, ultimately, such arguments are based more on conjecture than anything else. Each side has a biased stake in wanting it to be either before or after 70AD. But ultimately, it doesn't matter much. Yeah, as a believer, it would be cool and strengthen my position to be able to say definitively that it was written before (and I think it likely was). But, really, that's not the crux of the issue. The issue is whether or not there is sufficient reason to believe Luke got it right and that Jesus made the prediction he did that ultimately came true. Yes, the argument is stronger if Luke has an earlier date. But since we don't know when it was written, we shouldn't stake our entire argument on the fact that it MUST have been written early, because it very well may not have been.