Visit our new blog. It lists all the new things that we are doing and what new material has been added to our site. We even list new missionaries who sign up with us for technical support so you can pray for them. FCM News
Lesson 10: The Olivet Discourse, Mark 13:1-37
by Brad Anderson
This material, often called The Olivet Discourse,
is the longest connected sermon in Mark's Gospel. It is also the
most difficult to understand. The main purpose of the discourse
is not to satisfy curiosity about the future but to give practical,
ethical teaching for the present time. In this discourse Jesus combines
eschatology (information about end time events) with exhortation.
He is preparing his disciples—and by implication the church—to
live and to witness in a hostile world.
The meaning of the passage is closely tied in with the two major
predictions in it: the destruction of the city of Jerusalem in AD
70 and the Tribulation at the end of the age. Probably the best
way to understand the discourse is to realize that Jesus shifts
back and forth between two viewpoints—near and remote future.
Some of the events even seem to describe the destruction of the
city, while others describe end time (tribulation) events. The former
event foreshadows the later event. [Some of the prophecies in the
OT (e.g., Joel) operate this way—a near event (e.g., a locust
invasion) is a forerunner or example of a future event (the Day
of the Lord). So this style of prophecy is not out of line.] It’s
often hard to tell which Jesus is talking about.
The Olivet Discourse was probably given on Tuesday or Wednesday
of the Passion Week.
Four Views on Future Events
Following are the four ways Christians have traditionally
viewed the eschatology (biblical predictions concerning the
last days) of the Olivet Discourse: Historicist: the events of the Discourse
cover the whole of church history. The Discourse is a kind
of pre-written account of church history. Preterist: all events described
in the Olivet Discourse happened during the destruction of
Jerusalem in AD 70. Futurist: although some of the events
obviously do refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70,
at least some of the events described will take place in the
future. Dispensationalists are futurists. Spiritualist: the events are symbolic
and allegorical, standing for spiritual conflicts the church
will endure.
Introduction to the Discourse (.1-4)
What impressed the disciples about the temple area? Its massive
stones and beautiful buildings. The temple was full of marble and
gold—very highly decorative and beautiful.
Herod the Great had rebuilt the temple area (beginning in 19 BC),
including the temple building itself. (The second temple, built
by Zerubbabel, had fallen into bad disrepair.) It was not completely
finished until AD 64. The courtyard had been greatly enlarged (to
about four hundred by five hundred yards) in order to accommodate
the large throngs of Jews who came to Jerusalem for the festivals.
The massive stones used for the construction may still be seen today,
since part of the wall escaped the destruction of AD 70. The temple
was an architectural wonder and its size and location dominated
Jerusalem. To the Jews, nothing was as magnificent as their temple.
What did Jesus say about the temple? “Not one stone here will
be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
Was this prophecy fulfilled? Yes, in AD 70, when Jerusalem and the
temple were destroyed by the Roman general Titus. Jesus' prophecy
is very specific: “Not one stone here will be left on another.”
Although some of the huge stones Herod's workmen used in the great
walls supporting the temple platform were not battered down by Titus's
soldiers, all the buildings on the temple platform, including the
temple itself to which the prophecy refers, were utterly destroyed.
So completely were they destroyed that no trace of them remains
today. Even their exact location on the temple mount is disputed.
Note that the location now changes to the Mount of Olives (hence
the name Olivet Discourse). What two things did the disciples want
to know? When will these things happen? And what will be the sign
that they are all about to be fulfilled?” The disciples apparently
saw the destruction of the temple as being connected with the end
of the age.
What the disciples wanted was a sign, some sure way by which they
might know that the destruction of the temple was about to occur
and that the end of the age was approaching. But Jesus refused to
give them “signs of the times.” Throughout the discourse
he is more concerned to prepare them by exhortation and warning
for the trials that lay ahead than to give them dates and signs.
Warnings Against Deceivers And False
Signs Of The End (.5-23)
How did Jesus suggest the disciples might be deceived? By the claims
of false messiahs. Read also .21-23 for same idea.
Are “wars and rumors of wars” a sign that the end times
are upon us? No (.7). Such things must necessarily happen, but the
end is “not yet.”
What “end” Jesus is talking about here (.7) likely refers
to both the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the age.
What will happen to the disciples? (.9) persecution, death, and
opportunities to witness for Christ. “They shall deliver you
up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye
shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony
against them.”
What must happen before the end? (.10) the gospel must first be
preached to all nations. In Matthew’s account the statement
of the universal preaching of the gospel ends with “and then
the end will come” (Matt 24:14). Jesus seems to be saying
here, “Instead of looking for signs of the end, get busy and
spread the `good news'! All nations must hear before the End comes.”
List some other things that will happen before the end. (.12-13)
Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children
will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. All
men will hate you because of me.
The phrase “abomination of desolation,” or “abomination
that causes desolation,” (.14) is an expression derived from
the Book of Daniel (cf. Dan 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). The word “abomination”
suggests something repugnant to God, while “desolation”
suggests that something will cause the temple to be deserted and
left desolate. The appearing of the “abomination of desolation”
is the one true sign that the end is very near.
The fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy of the “abomination that
causes desolation” is usually found in the desecration of
the altar of burnt offering in the temple of Jerusalem by a representative
of Antiochus IV, Epiphanes, in 167 BC. [He set up an altar to the
Greek god Zeus in the temple and sacrificed a pig on it, thereby
defiling the temple.] The fact that Jesus uses the same expression
here makes it clear that its fulfillment was not restricted to the
events of Daniel’s time. What it does refer to has been hotly
debated. The temple was again profaned in AD 67-68, just before
the city’s destruction, and the destruction of the temple
certainly again defiled it. Futurists see this prophecy as being
fulfilled again (or fully) in the end time by the Antichrist. [The
multiple fulfillment view suggests that the prophecy was fulfilled
in the Maccabean period, in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70,
and by the Antichrist in the Escaton.]
The warnings of verses 14-18 make good sense in the context of the
approach of the Roman army before the Fall of Jerusalem in AD 70.
Summarize what the days will be like before the Second Coming. No
time to rescue anything from one’s house, very difficult for
those pregnant or with small children, extra bad if it occurs in
winter.
The language of verse 19, though fulfilled partially in the great
stress that occurred at the Fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, looks forward
to the Great Tribulation that will precede the End. Mark uses language
derived from Daniel's portrayal of the last days (Dan 12:1; cf.
Jer 30:7). Nowhere else in Scripture is there a reference to the
shortening of the time of tribulation (.20).
The Coming of the Son of Man (.24-27)
“In those days” (.24) is a common OT expression having
eschatological associations (cf. Jer 3:16; Joel 3:1; Zech 8:23).
Matthew’s account makes clear that Jesus is talking about
eschatological events, not the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
The “end” immediately follows the tribulations of this
time.
The coming of the Son of Man will be associated with abnormal events
in the atmosphere. The imagery and language are derived from the
OT descriptions of the Day of the Lord. The quotation is an echo
of Isaiah 13:10, but other OT passages reveal similar language.
It is difficult to know whether the poetic language here is to be
understood literally or figuratively. The repeated assertion in
Scripture that the end times will be accompanied by cosmic disturbances
seems to imply that there will be unprecedented atmospheric disturbances
of some kind. Such events demonstrate the judgment of God upon the
world.
Men “will see” Jesus and see him for who he really is.
Whereas he has been the lowly Suffering Servant, despised and rejected
by men, the Son of Man at his Second Coming will come in triumph—”with
great power and glory.” The Second Coming will be personal,
visible, and glorious.
What will Jesus do when he returns? (.27) bring together his people
so that they may be with him. He sends forth his angels to gather
the elect from all over the world. The term “the elect”
refer to all believers.
The Lesson of the Fig Tree (.28-31)
What’s the point of the example of the fig tree (.28-29)?
The fig tree loses its leaves in the fall, and when in the spring
the sap rises in its branches and the tree begins to leaf out, summer
cannot be far off. The parable is essentially an antidote to despair.
In contrast to the sufferings and persecutions promised in the previous
verses, here the prospect of the coming of the Son of Man is offered.
The chief problem in verse 29 is the identification of “these
things.” Do they refer to the events surrounding the fall
of the city of Jerusalem or the events immediately preceding the
end of the age? What Jesus appears to be saying is that the signs
that foreshadow the end are not to be confined to a remote future;
his hearers would themselves experience them. [Thus it must be true
that parts of the prophecy concern the present (AD 70) and parts
are future (the Escaton).]
The same problem appears in the next verse—who is “this
generation”? Many interpretations have been suggested. It
seems best to understand it to mean Jesus’ own generation
specifically as well as a future generation who will be living at
the time of the Great Tribulation. Thus, Jesus’ audience will
experience these things, and future disciples will experience similar
things at the Second Coming.
How certain are Jesus’ words? (.31) There is nothing that
would cause them to fail.
An Exhortation to Watchfulness (.32-37)
Jesus repeatedly calls for watchfulness: “Be on guard! Be
alert!” (.33); “Therefore keep watch” (.35); “do
not let him find you sleeping” (.36); and “Watch!”
(.37). Again, these warnings would be meaningless and misleading
to his audience if there were no near fulfillment of these prophecies.
“That day” clearly refers to the Second Coming. Of “those
days,” i.e., the days that precede the time of the End, certain
signs have been given; but of “that day” neither the
angels of heaven nor Jesus himself knows the time. Only the Father
knows that time. And Jesus, at his ascension, clearly says that
it was not for the disciples “to know the times or dates the
Father has set by his own authority” (Acts 1:7). A map of
the future would be a hindrance, not a help, to faith. Their responsibility
and ours is to get busy and do his work without being concerned
about date setting.
How do you explain the fact that Jesus says he did not know the
day or the hour of “that day”? Jesus’ ignorance
of the day or hour of his coming must be understood in terms of
the NT teaching concerning the Incarnation. A lack of knowledge
was part of the emptying of himself (Phil 2:5f). Jesus purposely
laid aside temporarily the exercise of his omniscience as part of
what was involved in his becoming man. How exactly the Son could
restrict himself in the use of his divine attributes is a mystery.
Conclusion: Because
of the nature of prophecy, the Olivet Discourse is somewhat difficult
to understand. However, we can understand enough of what Jesus said
to obey his commands to be alert and be on guard. Jesus’ comments
here must have been a comfort to Mark’s audience, who were
threatened by persecution for their loyalty to Jesus.
Applications:
1. The Second Coming of Christ is a guaranteed future event. It
will happen just as Jesus said it would.
2. Instead of looking for signs of the end, believers should be
busy spreading the gospel. All nations must hear before the End
comes.
3. No human knows the day or the hour of the Second Coming of Christ.
Thus, all date setting and speculation about the time is futile
and counter-productive. Those groups that participate in such speculation
are most likely cults.
4. Believers must be on guard against false prophets who make messianic
claims.
5. Believers should not be upset or alarmed by wars or natural disasters.
Such events will occur until the End.
6. God is sovereignly controlling history to achieve His own purposes.
All things will unfold just as the Bible describes.
7. Our responsibility as disciples is to be ready for Jesus’
return and to be zealous in spreading the gospel until “that
day.” Believers should watch and work in the expectation of
his imminent return.
Discussion:
1. Many people speculate about the date of the Second Coming. Some
even say that it has already happened (the JW’s). What should
be our response to such teaching? We should see it for what it is—false
prophecy, pure speculation, deceit, and falsehood. We should expose
it for what it is and avoid those groups who participate in it.
2. Jesus repeatedly warns his disciples to be ready and to watch.
What application do these warnings have for modern believers? Be
ready for the Second Coming. Read 2 Pet 3:13-14. The Parousia should
motivate us to holy living and service for God.
3. Why is the futurist approach the best way to interpret the Olivet
Discourse? It seems to handle the facts of the passage best, recognizing
both a near and far fulfillment.
