What Does the Olivet Discourse Predict? | Mark Strauss on Mark 13

The Olivet Discourse (Mark 13; Matt 24; Luke 21) has puzzled interpreters for centuries. Is Jesus predicting the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, his future return, or both? Dr. Mark Strauss joins Kirk E. Miller on What in the Word? to explore this complex passage. They examine its structure, exegetical issues, and interpretive options—futurist (dispensationalist), preterist, and telescoping views.

Learn how Jesus’s apocalyptic language challenges us to live expectantly in light of the current tribulation and his imminent return.

Follow the show on YouTube, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and more.

Special offers

Connect with us

Ready to increase biblical literacy? Like and share. To go the extra mile, leave us a review on your preferred platform. 

See all of our episodes.

Subscribe to get future episodes. (Bonus: We’ll send you a discount to use on your first purchase.)

Episode guest: Mark Strauss

Mark L. Strauss (PhD, Aberdeen) is the university professor of New Testament at Bethel Seminary, where he has served since 1993. He is the author and co-author of over 20 books and many articles, and has edited and co-edited 40 volumes focusing on topics like the Gospels, hermeneutics, and Bible translation. He is on the Committee for Bible Translation for the New International Version, serves on the board of Bible Study Fellowship, and is an associate editor for the NIV Study Bible. He has been married for nearly 40 years to his wife, Roxanne, a marriage and family therapist, and together they have three grown children.

Episode synopsis

The context of the Olivet Discourse

Kirk E. Miller and Mark Strauss identify the contextual background of the Olivet Discourse found in the synoptic Gospels (Mark 13; Matt 24; Luke 21). The passage is embedded within a series of events where Jesus interacts with the temple and its leaders, thereby setting the stage for these apocalyptic predictions.

The nature of the debate

The Olivet Discourse describes Jesus predicting the temple’s destruction and subsequent eschatological events, sparking questions about their interpretation and timing. It raises questions about whether Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, his future return, the destruction of a yet-future temple, or a combination of some of these elements.

The dilemma of “this generation”

One of the most challenging issues is Jesus’s statement about “this generation” not passing away (13:30). Each interpretative camp must grapple with what “generation” refers to and what it means for it not to pass away until “all these things take place” (ESV), particularly if one understands the discourse to predict events after the lifetime of Jesus’s immediate hearers.

Apocalyptic language

Another critical interpretive issue involves the cosmic upheaval imagery in 13:24–27. Could these be apocalyptic descriptions of first-century events, or do they necessitate a literal, future interpretation? The discussion highlights varying hermeneutical approaches to these vivid descriptions.

Futurist (dispensationalist) view

The futurist or dispensationalist view contends that Jesus’s words pertain to future events, including a future tribulation, a future rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, and Jesus’s second coming.

Advocates of the futurist view highlight portions of the text that seem too grandiose or sweeping to refer solely to the first century. They point to cosmic imagery and the notion of “the end” as indicating future fulfillment. They also emphasize that some language seems to correspond with eschatological events described in other parts of the Bible.

Preterist view

The preterist view holds that Jesus’s predictions in the Olivet Discourse were fulfilled in the first century, specifically in AD 70 with the destruction of the Jerusalem temple. They point to the fact that the nature of the disciples’ question concerns the destruction of the temple before them (13:1–4), which happened in AD 70. Thus, they argue that Jesus’s discourse corresponds and predicts those and related first-century events.

This view also appeals to 13:30’s reference to “this generation,” which of course fits a first-century fulfillment during the lifetime of Jesus’s hearers. Preterists argue that the intense language accords with apocalyptic standards and matches historical records like those of the historian Josephus.

Mixed (telescoping) view

Mark Strauss advocates for a mixed (or telescoping) interpretation of the Olivet Discourse. This third view suggests that the discourse overlaps the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and eschatological events concerning Jesus’s second coming. This hybrid view sees some parts of the Olivet Discourse as clearly tied to immediate first-century events, while seeing others as pointing toward the second coming.

This view contends that prophetic language often embraces multiple horizons, addressing imminent and distant futures. It posits that Jesus might have “telescoped” these events, seeing them as closely related but occurring at different times.

Passage structure

Kirk and Mark emphasize the importance of understanding the structure of the passage:

• Jesus’s predication of the temple’s destruction and the disciple’s question (13:1–4)
• First-century events leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (13:5–13)
• Warnings related to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (13:14–23)
• The physical, second coming of Christ (13:24–27)
• The parable of the fig tree relating to the discernible signs of Jerusalem’s destruction (13:28–31)
• The parable of the owner’s return, relating to the indiscernible time of Jesus’s second coming (13:32–37)

The passage’s initial verses forecast events involving or leading up to the temple destruction, followed by deeper apocalyptic visions likely referring to the second coming. According to this mixed view, this layered understanding helps to reconcile textual tensions and offers a holistic grasp of the discourse’s multifaceted nature.

Practical significance

Outside of its exegetical and theological debates, the discourse’s primary message remains clear: a call for vigilance. Jesus calls for vigilance against being lead astray and vigilance in being prepared for his return. Believers should live in a state of spiritual alertness and readiness for God’s unfolding plans.

Suggestions for teaching

When teaching or preaching the Olivet Discourse, Kirk and Mark suggest:

1. Display humility and respect for differing opinions, encouraging thoughtful reflection and discussion.
2. Focus on the passage’s structure to clarify its proper interpretation and what each element predicts.
3. Emphasize the practical implications of vigilance and readiness in Christian life. They underscore the importance of remaining vigilant and faithful as central tenets of Christian eschatological hope.

---

Logos values thoughtful and engaging discussions on important biblical topics. However, the views and interpretations presented in this episode are those of the individuals speaking and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Logos. We recognize that Christians may hold different perspectives on this passage, and we welcome diverse engagement and respectful dialogue.

Select resources from Mark Strauss

Kirk’s recommended resources on the gospel of Mark