Prophecy and Discipleship

The gospel for 1st Sunday in Advent (2020) was Mark 13:32-37. Now at the end of the liturgical year, the reading again appears this coming Sunday, the 33rd Sunday of Ordinary Time in lectionary cycle B. Our Gospel reading is from Mark 13:24-37, the end verses of the larger “Olivet Discourse” in Mark’s gospel (13:1-37). In the Gospel of Mark there is no passage more challenging than the prophetic discourse of Jesus on the destruction of the Temple. The questions posed by the form and content of the chapter and by its relationship to the Gospel as a whole are complex and difficult and have been the occasion of extensive literature. The Olivet discourse is unique as the longest uninterrupted course of private instruction recorded by Mark. Moreover, it is the only extended speech attributed to Jesus by the evangelist.

William Lane outlines Mark 13 as follows:

    • Jesus’ Prophecy of Impending Destruction. Ch. 13:1–4
    • Warning Against Deception. Ch. 13:5–8
    • A Call to Steadfastness Under Persecution. Ch. 13:9–13
    • The Appalling Sacrilege and the Necessity for Flight. Ch. 13:14–23
    • the gospel for this coming Sunday appears in bold
    • The Triumph of the Son of Man. Ch. 13:24–27
      (the gospel for this coming Sunday appears in bold)
    • The Lesson of the Fig Tree. Ch. 13:28–31
    • The Call to Vigilance. Ch. 13:32–37

The Olivet discourse occupies a special position in the Marcan outline. It provides the bridge between Jesus’ public ministry, culminating in the conflict with the Temple authorities (Chs. 11:11–12:12), and the Passion Narrative, where the conflict with authority is the occasion of Jesus’ condemnation and death (Ch. 14:1f., 10f., 42–65). By locating the eschatological discourse in this crucial position, and by recurring reference to the destruction of the Temple in the context of Jesus’ trial and execution (Chs. 14:58; 15:29, 39), the evangelist points to the relationship which exists between the judgment upon Jerusalem implied by the discourse and the death of Jesus. This theological understanding is reflected by the literary form of verses 5–37. Jesus’ words are a farewell address providing instruction and consolation for his disciples just prior to his death. Ch. 13 unites prophecy concerning the future with exhortation regulating the conduct of the disciples in the period when the Master will no longer be with them, and this is characteristic of a farewell discourse.

The primary function of Ch. 13 is not to disclose esoteric information but to promote faith and obedience in a time of distress and upheaval. With profound pastoral concern, Jesus prepared his disciples and the Church for a future period which would entail both persecution and mission. The discourse clearly presupposes a period of historical time between the resurrection and the parousia. The relationship of the necessity of suffering to the experience of vindication and glory established in 8:34–38 is stressed once again by the announcement of the manifestation in glory of the Son of Man in the context of  suffering for the people of God.

This message was of profound significance for the Christians of Rome, harassed by persecution and disturbed by the rumors of the developments in Palestine in the sixties. The inclusion of the eschatological discourse in the Gospel was motivated by the same pastoral concern that had prompted Jesus’ teaching. Mark cautions his readers that the community is to find its authentic eschatological dimension not in apocalyptic fervor but in obedience to Jesus’ call to cross-bearing and evangelism in the confidence that this is the will of God which must be fulfilled before the parousia. Jesus’ words provided a bed-rock for Christian hope. The witness of the eschatological community not only focuses on the suffering Son of Man whose crucifixion and resurrection comprise the core of the gospel but also looks forward to the triumphant Son of Man whose appearance represents the one event in light of which the present is illumined. This fact enabled Mark to face the crisis of the sixties with realism and hope.

There is always a group, already predisposed to end-times analysis, who seem to think that “no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” does not apply to them – and given enough study they can know the end times and/or the second coming. Witherington [338] offers that “one must see this discourse as the final example of the sort of private explanation and inside information Jesus gave his disciples. One of its rhetorical goals is to get the disciples to focus less on the things that will happen and more on the one who will bring all things to a conclusion in due course – the Son of Man.”


William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publication Co., 1974). 444-5, 81-4

Ben Witherington, The Gospel of Mark: A Social-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2001) 336-50

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.