This post is a more detailed discussion regarding the nature of Luke’s third prediction of Jerusalem’s fall, a far more detailed speech (the others come in 13:34-35; 19:41-44). It is a bit of a deep dive beyond this morning’s post which included summary information. So, feel free to dive in …. or wait until we pick up the thread tomorrow morning.

The speech’s character emerges when one examines the parallels in Matthew 24:1-35 and Mark 13:1-37. A comparison of these parallels shows how Luke has drawn out some additional teaching and made some distinct points. Some of these points emerge from the additional material Luke includes (vv. 18, 21-22, 24, 28 are certainly additional material; vv. 19-20, 23b-26, 34-36 are probably additional). Other emphases surface because of the way Luke has presented the traditional material. Where Matthew speaks specifically of the “the desolating abomination” (Mt 24:15, referring to Daniel 12:11), for example, Luke simply refers to the “desolation” (Lk 21:20).

The significance of these differences becomes clear as one carefully compares the accounts. Luke emphasizes the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 in a way the other Gospels do not. Mark and Matthew anticipate the fall of Jerusalem in the way they introduce the discourse, but Luke focuses on the short-term event in a way Matthew and Mark do not. His temporal indicators (vv. 9, 12) draw the reader back toward the present before really focusing on the end in verses 25-28. A transition begins to appear in verses 20-24, but until verse 19 the focus is still on events before the judgment of the capital in A.D. 70, which is not yet the end.

This coming Sunday is the 33rd Sunday in Ordinary Time, Lectionary Cycle C. Two Sundays ago was the encounter with Zacchaeus in Jericho (Luke 19:1-10). This followed by Jesus’ parable of the ten gold coins (19:11-27) and Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem and the events of Palm Sunday (v.28). What follows has been a series of confrontations with the Jerusalem authorities in the Temple, an example of which was the previous Sunday gospel in which the Sadducees confronted Jesus around the topic of resurrection. The confrontation now shifts to the future tense. The extended dialogue concerns the:

• coming persecutions and destruction of the Temple (21:5-19), our gospel reading;
• destruction of the Jerusalem (21:20-24); and
• coming of the Son of Man (21:25-36).

It is tempting to refer to these verses as St. Luke’s “little apocalypse,” given its similarity to the accounts in Mark and Matthew – and the ongoing fascination of evangelical American Christianity with the “end times” popularized by the “Left Behind” series of books and movies. Described in another post later this morning with more details for those interested, Luke’s account is different in that all the “temporal markers” in the telling are focused on the present. Luke reserves the future focus for later verses outside our gospel text. Up through verse 18 the focus remains on events before the judgment of the capital in A.D. 70, which is not yet the end. While there are apocalyptic elements, it is not the final words of Jesus, but an introduction to his suffering and death.