Mark 13

Mark Chapter 13

(2021 - I'm going to do this like I did Luke 21, and just start over below the 2020 entry)

This chapter begins with Jesus' statement that not one stone of these buildings will be left upon the other. This is the same point in time as we saw yesterday in Luke 21, and that we will see tomorrow in Matthew 24. For some reason, Matthew's account gets all the attention. I know that he wrote mostly to the Jews, and that Luke wrote to Gentiles, and very likely considered Greeks his main audience. But Mark....Per MSB notes I recorded in Mark 1, this book is generally believed to be written to the Christians in Rome, and primarily the Gentile Christians in Rome. It is referred to in ancient discussions as the memoirs of Peter as he related them to John Mark - who never met Jesus. Others say Mark records the things Peter preached about Jesus. As such, it was written to people who were not all that familiar with Jewish feasts, traditions, and so on, nor with the Old Testament. With that in mind....

"....There will not be left here one stone upon another..." Yet, as of today, there still are stacked stones at the wailing wall. So we take this figuratively, or we take it as unfulfilled. 2021 - Or we take it that the wall still there was not the temple at all. I have seen some video's that say the original Temple was south, on the next hill, from where the dome of the rock is now. So this may have been fulfilled, and Satan is just deceiving us about it for some purpose of his own.

After they've left, but while they are sitting on the Mt of Olives, opposite the temple - looking at the temple from the place everyone now takes their photos of the Dome - the four innermost apostles - Peter, James, John, and Andrew - ask Jesus two questions IN PRIVATE. Only Luke didn't mention in private. Luke says "they" questioned him. Luke wasn't there, and neither was Mark. Matthew was...

2022 - There is a significant difference here in Mark from the accounts in Luke and Matthew. The difference is this verse:

"3 And as he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished?"" [Mar 13:3-4 ESV]. Mark is very specific that these questions were asked privately. BUT, it could mean they were asked on the Mt of Olives rather than back at the Temple, where there would have been people around. We know from Jesus' trial that many people did hear him say not one stone would be left upon another...or perhaps they were remembering when he said he could build the temple back in three days. He talked of building back in three days at an earlier time, NOT at this time, per the Harmony. Here is how the equivalent verse in Matt 24 is worded:

"7 And they asked him, "Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?"" [Luk 21:7 ESV].

So as to the "privately" part, both Mark and Matthew use that word. But I don't think we can be certain about whether many disciples, the 12 and others were there, and specifically the four, or whether ONLY those four were there. It could also be that the four were induced by others to ask the questions they were afraid to ask. Perhaps only these four heard the answers directly, and then they immediately passed on what they had heard. Just as possible, they went forward and asked the questions as all the disciples that were there gathered around to hear the explanation. Interesting that if it was the four alone - Peter and Andrew, James and John - then none of the gospel writers who actually talk about these great questions was actually there to hear it first hand. John doesn't mention it at all in his gospel. Andrew and James wrote no gospel, and Mark only gets this second hand from Peter. So if we take this as only the four being present, then we have no first hand account of what Jesus said at all. I believe God would preserve the words, inspire the words that he wants us to hear, nevertheless, that leaves us with no first hand account. Why would Mark imply that there were only those four, while Matthew's account tends to make us think that privately just means away from the Temple crowds? Is it usual for Matthew to use the word "disciples" when referring to the apostles only, or even to a subset of the apostles? Here are some references:

"21 Another of the disciples said to him, "Lord, let me first go and bury my father."" [Mat 8:21 ESV]. From context, this "disciple" was not one of the 12.

"1 And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every affliction." [Mat 10:1 ESV]. Here, Matthew refers exclusively to the 12 when using the word disciples. It is Strong's G3101 in both cases. So Matthew throws this word around pretty casually, using it first to describe Jesus' followers in general and again to refer only to the 12.

"49 And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers!" [Mat 12:49 ESV]. In context, this was about the crowd, NOT at all exclusively about the 12.

"36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field."" [Mat 13:36 ESV]. This verse shows us that Matthew used "disciples" to refer to a subset of the crowds to which Jesus spoke. That subset seems at least to refer to those who were more than casual listeners. There were crowds of people that Jesus spoke to, but then later, he would speak to his disciples. In this verse, disciples could mean either just the 12 or it could mean just the core followers. In any case, these are contrasted with the "crowds".

So now back to the original question: To whom exactly did Jesus talk on the Mt of Olives? We don't know! Perhaps he spoke with the four about some of it, and with a larger group about other parts. Maybe Matthew's gospel relates the part that he heard, while Mark relates only what Peter recollects - from a private conversation but also some of what was said to a larger group. We DO NOT KNOW, so any conclusions based primarily on who was being addressed is a shaky conclusion. Best not to depend on that.

But you have to go with something. I am going to go with there being more than one conversation while they were out there on that mountain all night. Jesus talked to the four for a while, and he talked to a larger group for a while. What we have in the gospels is a collection of what various people remember about Jesus' words that night, mostly from interviews with people that were there and heard what he said. I think it is fair to say that Matthew heard a lot of it, and as an insider - as one of the 12 - had more access to those who heard it all than probably any other gospel writer would have had. Mark's account came almost exclusively from Peter's recollection. Peter likely heard it all. But it wasn't written down until quite a while later when Peter was in Rome. But Peter could have been telling the story consistently for that whole time.

Enough on that. Going with the "multiple conversations" version and moving on.

The two questions here are "When will these things be", and "What will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished". So the phrasing again requests a general idea of when these stones will be thrown down, and the expectation is that it is far enough away from that current time that they wanted to be able to identify precisely when it was coming to pass. They wanted to be able to identify the prophecy being fulfilled by pointing to specific - and unique - events that would take place just prior to the stones being destroyed. 2021 - These are the same two questions that are recorded in Luke. So Luke and Mark have the questions the same, and Mark is more specific as to the audience.

2022 - Generally, Mark and Luke ask the question of how far in the future will the stones be thrown down, and how will we know when that time is really close? There is nothing here about the sign of Jesus return - they really don't understand that there will be a resurrection from the dead and a second coming anyway, so how could they be asking about that? They are asking, in Luke and Mark, specifically about the destruction of the Temple. In Matthew though, the questions are different. Here they are for comparison:

"3 As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"" [Mat 24:3 ESV]. Three questions here. Only the first is about the destruction of the Temple. The second is about the second coming (or the rapture! 2023 - Did they even know about the rapture at this point?), and the third question is about the end of the church/Gentile age which would mean the end of the blindness of the Jews and the fulfillment of the OT promises. So we would expect there to be material in Matthew that is not present at all in Mark and Luke. Is that the case? If so, the add'l material in Matthew could be expected to apply to these last two questions in Matthew, and not at all to the destruction of Jerusalem. Does that work out? I know it cannot possibly or someone would have interpreted it that way before. But it is something I will look for, because it would sure bring a lot of clarity to this passage.

The start of Jesus' answer seems to understand the question exactly the same way. He says a lot of charlatans claiming to be him are going to appear between that current time and the time Jesus is talking about. There will be a lot of wars and rumors of wars. None of these signs are unique enough to qualify as "signs". Vs 7 ends with "the end is not yet", and vs 8 begins with "for". Vs 8 mentions international conflicts, which would seem to fit into the "not yet" category, but then goes on to mention earthquakes and famines, and how these are just the beginning. If they are just the beginning, then these are not signs of the fulfillment of the prophecy either.

Verse 9 starts with "But be on your guard..." This preposition seemed to me to be an indicator of a subject change in Luke's account, and seems to be used in the same way here. The subject changes to persecution by government. Then vs 10 says the gospel must be proclaimed to all nations. (There are many NT verses that say this has already occurred.) Also, Paul surely stood before governors, as did others, and testified of Jesus, and this during times of great persecution. If these are the events Jesus is speaking of, then it all points to 70 AD as being the time when this prophecy is fulfilled.

Jesus goes on to speak of what seems like universal hatred of those who believe. And Jesus again says they aren't to prepare their replies to questions in advance, and says that many will be killed for their testimony, betrayed by father, brother, or child. This verse:

13 And you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. [Mar 13:13 ESV] So not all those who believe during this time will die. Some will be saved. The preposition is there again, transitioning the time from what will happen in 70 AD to what happens at the end of Great Tribulation. I think the case is weaker here, less clear. I would appeal to Luke's account before this one.

2022 - I think, today, that up through at least 13 we are talking exclusively about events leading up to AD 70. The persecution and betrayal in view is associated with the initial spread of the gospel, and the push back from Jews, Gentiles, and secular governments all. (2024 - And Paul!) Christians were hated. There were wars here and there. There were famines and earthquakes in various places. All these thing took place before 70 AD. Note that not one of these things is unique enough to serve as "the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished". All these things are the things that should NOT concern them as indicating an imminent destruction of the Temple. They were to push on through these things, not hunker down and wait for the end.

2022 - Comparing the three accounts, there is enough direct correlation between Mk 13:1-13, Matt 24:1-14, and Lk 21:1-19 for them to all be relating the same words of Jesus. A little is added in one, or left out of another, but all three passages track quite closely to this point. And I believe that up to this point, Jesus is relating to them things that will happen before 70 AD. General things, about which they ought not get overly concerned, but continue to preach the gospel.

Then we get to vs 14, which again starts with "but". Jesus has moved along, answering the question of what will go on in the world generally between now and when the "not one stone" prophecy will be fulfilled. Here is 14:

14 "But when you see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. [Mar 13:14 ESV]

In Luke, when it talked about not going back to Jerusalem, it prefaced it by saying Jerusalem would be surrounded by armies, so don't go home. That was pretty clearly about 70 AD. But here, the abomination of desolation is front and center, not surrounding armies. Further, it says woe to those nursing infants, and pray that this doesn't happen in winter - because believers are going to be persecuted like never ever before in history, and their preferred reaction is going to be to run. Vs 19 says this:

19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, and never will be. [Mar 13:19 ESV]

This same phrasing is used of several earthquakes in Revelation. This language is about great tribulation. This is the sign that this prophecy is about to be fulfilled - the one about the sign, not about the stones: The abomination of desolation will be where he shouldn't - I'm thinking that is when Antichrist will cut off the sacrifice, stand in the holy place, and demand that the world worship only him.

(((Find the verses in Revelation that identify some of the events described there as unique in history. Also find the ones about the abomination of desolation requiring all to worship him.) One way to see this is that neither of these prophecies, neither event, has yet happened. The stones are still stacked. Antichrist will therefore build a temple on temple mount, atop the existing foundation, and once Jesus arrives to depose him, those stones will be leveled. Perhaps it is Jesus then, that will build Ezekiel's temple, and it will be used for worship during the Millennial.

One more phrase Jesus uses - for the sake of the elect, those days will be cut short. This phrase also ties directly to a phrase in Revelation. Find that verse, and fix it in the chronology of that time. (At this time, 5/11/20, I believe the first prophecy, about the stones, was fulfilled in 70 AD, and I believe the sign of Jesus' coming is yet to be seen, but will be, during Trib/Great Trib, when the Antichrist stops the sacrifices in the temple.)

2022 - Next, both Mark and Matthew reference the abomination of desolation. Matthew makes sure we tie this back to Daniel's prophecy. Luke does not mention the abomination, but he ties right back into the narrative as found in Mark and Matthew just one verse later. All Luke leaves out is the abomination verse, and then all three are right back in sync, as they have been since the original questions. (Does Luke leave it out because it is about the Jews only, and Jerusalem only?)

The abomination is mentioned in Dan. 9:27; 11:31; and 12:11. What was Daniel seeing? The time before the rapture or the time before the second advent? Well the instructions here, in all three gospels, are about what to do when you see the abomination. If this was about the rapture, wouldn't it say "Lift up your heads, redemption draweth nigh"? But it doesn't. It says run for the hills, it says don't go home, it says hope you are not pregnant. So the appearance of the abomination does not mean the rapture is in the next few minutes. Whatever it portends is not in the next few minutes. You need to get away from Jerusalem and go underground for a period of time.

So. We do seem to have moved well beyond 70 AD out to end times events. If this is about 70 AD, then there was an abomination of desolation in 70 AD. I've never heard of that. Some say there was one during AE IV, but that was during the intertestamentary period. Surely we can't think Jesus was speaking of the past here and looking back at the time of the Maccabees and Hasmoneans? IF such a huge event had taken place in association with 70 AD, we would know about it. Therefore, my conclusion is that in Mark 13:14, Jesus has moved beyond that to the "end of the age".

2022 -

Mark 13:14b-16, Matt 24:16-18 are almost precisely the same. Luke 21:20-21 are similar, but NOT the same. Note this phrase found in both Mark and Matthew:

"15 Let the one who is on the housetop not go down, nor enter his house, to take anything out," [Mar 13:15 ESV]. NEITHER go down, NOR enter in...to take anything out.

"17 Let the one who is on the housetop not go down to take what is in his house," [Mat 24:17 ESV]. DO NOT go down to get anything.

Surely this sentence was uttered almost exactly like this by Jesus himself. They both say it. But why would you not go back into your house if you were on the roof? You can't leave if you don't go back in. There were no fire escapes back then. Is this hyperbole? Did Jesus EVER use hyperbole? If you were in Judea - the whole country, not just if you were in Jerusalem - you were to flee to the mountains. You need to go hide big time. If you were in the field, you were not to go home to get your coat. If you were on your own rooftop, you weren't to go back in the house. There had to be an outside escape of some sort, else this imprisons you on your own rooftop.

What we need to understand here is once the abomination of desolation is SEEN PUBLICLY in the holy place, you no longer have time to pack. Satan is in full persecution mode, he is out of hiding, he is openly hostile to Jews. I think it means to Jews because I think the church will be gone. If I think that, then these events are post-rapture, pre-advent2. What is being described in Matthew and Mark in these verses is the beginning of Great Tribulation. The unveiling of the abomination IS "the sign of your coming and of the end of the age". Unmistakable. Unique. The question is from Matthew's gospel, but the answer is in both Mark and Matthew.

2022 -

BUT, this is NOT what Luke is talking about. I believe that in Luke 21:20-24, we are still being told about 70 AD. After all, Luke is writing to Gentiles. Luke does not tie us to a unique sign - the abomination. He says when the city is surrounded, as Rome surrounded it in 70 AD when it was packed with people, THEN run away if you are not already trapped. Luke doesn't mention any houses. He says if you are in Judea, and can get away, then do so. Because Rome is about to come down hard on Jews in retribution of their rebelliousness against the Emperor. They will take everything, they will kill people summarily if they are believed to be Jews. Note specifically in Lk 21:24 that the Gentiles will trod over Jerusalem. Rome made it illegal for a Jew to even come within sight of Jerusalem. They renamed the city. There are a tremendous number of differences between Luke's account in these verses and what is going on in Mark and Matthew.

2022 -

We find these parallel verses in Mark and Matthew, but they are NOT found at all in Luke:

"19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, and never will be. 20 And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, whom he chose, he shortened the days." [Mar 13:19-20 ESV];

"21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short." [Mat 24:21-22 ESV].

It is very difficult to argue here that both Mark and Matthew are talking about the time post-rapture, pre-second advent in these verses, and I think they switched over to this period in the verses where the abomination was mentioned.

SO, THIS IS KEY: Luke 21 is DIFFERENT in subject to Mark 13 and Matthew 24. Luke continues on with the 70 AD information, the other two jump ahead to Great Tribulation.

Surely vs 24 bears out that Jesus is talking about the time of Great Tribulation, just before He appears as conquering king in this verse:

24 "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, [Mar 13:24 ESV]

Signs in the heavens. Only God does such. These are unique signs. They cannot be faked.

2022 - The term "great tribulation" is a modern invention making it more convenient to reference the last 3 1/2 years as opposed to the first 3 1/2, which are merely tribulation. So let's turn loose of those terms as we read verses 24-27 in Mark 13. We have maintained up to this point that these verses are about EITHER the rapture, OR the second coming. Do vss 24-27 help with that determination?

We see three parallel accounts, very similar, of things we need to make decisions about.

First, we see the signs:

"24 "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, 25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken." [Mar 13:24-25 ESV]

"29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken." [Mat 24:29 ESV]

"25 "And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, 26 people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. For the powers of the heavens will be shaken." [Luk 21:25-26 ESV] NOTE that Luke's gospel appears to have come back into sync with Mark and Matthew, though Luke is still not precisely the same. Luke is not specific about what the signs in sun, moon and stars will be, but all three are mentioned as in Mark and Matthew.

The verses below are, I believe, relevant to understanding what time is in view in these three gospel passages.

This OT verse:

"31 The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon to blood, before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes." [Joe 2:31 ESV]. Could be about the same time as in the verses above. Another part of this passage is quoted by Paul as the explanation of the events of the day of Pentecost. But we didn't have any heavenly signs on that day. So at best, this is an incomplete prophecy.

Sun darkened might equal sun turned to darkness.

Moon won't give light could equal moon turned to blood.

"15 The sun and the moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining." [Joe 3:15 ESV]. The stars aren't falling here. I would say this is something different. I also believe this verse is just before the battle Christ comes with his army to fight. This is just before the second advent. This verse is not about the rapture.

2024 - Oh my....if the interpretation above is correct, then the signs in the heavens WILL occur TWICE! The first time is just before the rapture, the second time just before Jesus reappears. So the signs - very similar but not exactly the same - do happen twice!

"12 When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood," [Rev 6:12 ESV]. (Added later, after a search for "stars") "13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale." [Rev 6:13 ESV]. This is the sixth seal. This seal is in the early stages of the final 7 years. This is, in my opinion, well before the second advent, but just before the rapture.

This earthquake is not mentioned in the gospels.

Is the sun becoming black = sun turned to darkness = sun darkened?

Is moon like blood=moon wont give light=moon turned to blood?

Surely the stars falling in the two gospels and in Rev 6, along with what is said of sun and moon, almost surely make them all the referencing the same time, the same signs, the same imminent event.

We can be pretty sure Joel 2 and Revelation 6 are talking about the same time. And if we put a nail in that, and we know that the 6th seal is NOT about the second advent, then Joel 2 and Rev 6 are about the rapture. And the only remaining question is whether or not the three gospel accounts of darkening sun and moon with no light - which is how Jesus described this time - are also referencing Joel and Revelation, and so the rapture. When we add Rev 6:13 to 12, and see that darkened sun, lightless moon, and falling stars all accompany the 6th seal, just as they all occur in Mark and Matthew, I think we just pretty much HAVE to tie them all to the same event. If we are going to say that event is Jesus' arrival to rule on earth, then he must rule during the trumpets, the thunders, and the bowls as the earth is being devastated by demons and curses and as/while the Antichrist is ruling in the Temple. Cannot be. Jesus is never going to allow the Antichrist to inhabit the Temple while he is personally on the earth. (There could be simultaneously a temple in Jerusalem and Ezekiel's temple elsewhere.)

"12 The fourth angel blew his trumpet, and a third of the sun was struck, and a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of their light might be darkened, and a third of the day might be kept from shining, and likewise a third of the night." [Rev 8:12 ESV]. We have moved ahead two chapters in Revelation and are into the trumpets. First, we are into the trumpets now. We've moved further into those final seven years. The wording here makes this sound like an ongoing condition, with diminished light during both daylight and dark. This would keep plants from growing, greatly diminish photosynthesis. I read these trumpet curses as occurring during Great Tribulation and accruing to the rebellious unsaved, rather than as a sign in the heavens that portended good things for Christians or Jews. But sun, moon, and stars all are mentioned here. (2024 - So is this three times we'll see these signs?)

Let me just add some more from Rev 6 and the opening of the 6th seal:

"14 The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, 16 calling to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, 17 for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?"" [Rev 6:14-17 ESV]

In these verses we can surely see "the powers of the heavens shaken" in Matthew and Mark. We can see "people fainting with fear and foreboding", and also the heavens shaken in the passage from Luke.

What is in Revelation but not in any of the three gospels? That earthquake in Rev 6:12.

What is in the gospels that is not in Revelation? The "roaring of the sea and the waves" in Luke.

(Later - the Greek word translated "roaring" in Luke is the word "echoes". It is the same word used here and translated sound: "2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting." [Act 2:2 ESV], and here where it is translated sound: "19 and the sound of a trumpet and a voice whose words made the hearers beg that no further messages be spoken to them." [Heb 12:19 ESV] NASB and a few others call it a blast of a trumpet. Could Luke be describing the actual sound of the sixth trumpet, or perhaps the voice of the archangel? Luke is repeating what he was told. Perhaps someone used the word "echo" meaning a "blast" and Luke associated that word with waves and surf, when what the "witness" meant was a trumpet blast. Could explain it. Not really necessary to explain it.)

I only see these two differences in the passages from the three gospels and Rev 6. I believe they are about the same time. For more confirmation, move ahead in Revelation just a little more. This verse, in Chapter 7 which is after the 6th seal, and before the seventh:

"14 I said to him, "Sir, you know." And he said to me, "These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." [Rev 7:14 ESV]

Then, put these verses in:

I have always interpreted these words about having to cut things short as being about Great Tribulation (the GT that WE use in our time to reference the wrath of God period). But as I am reading this now, this refers to the things that will happen to the earth during the first 5+ seals, and not at all to the wrath that comes after. So even those first seals will see horror beyond anything ever experienced on earth before. The things that happen during the first 5 are bad enough to end human life on earth if they had been allowed to just continue. All men would have been killed by those. But those days are shortened for the elect because they will be raptured out of them. Perhaps...and this really seems to ring true...the term "great tribulation" as used here is about the entirety of the seven years. Rather than have the saved go through all that, for the elect, the time is shortened as they are raptured out of the very worst of what is coming.

Note that this is NOT the same passage where it says the very elect might be deceived were the days not shortened. This is about all men dying.

Or...this is about being saved. It could mean that the lying wonders of Satan might ultimately convince all men to take that mark. If that happened, then none living here at the end of the church age would be saved. I don't know if I agree with that...But it has to mean something. If you go back and put it in context with where it falls in Mark 13 and Matt 24, then as I am interpreting it, this "danger" of "no flesh would have been saved" is about the time from the revealing of the abomination of desolation until the rapture. That's the segment of end times we are talking about.

The word here translated "flesh" is Greek "sarx", and it means "the soft substance of the living body, which covers the bones and is permeated with blood". So it is about living breathing creatures.

We have to decide whether the rapture changed the progression of events from there forward, such that "flesh" was able to survive the trumpets, thunders, and bowls, or whether what this means is that things were getting so "irresistibly" evil that no one alive at that time could have remained loyal to Christ. If that's what it means, then it means Church age Gentiles would have turned from Christ to Satan - unknowingly because they were deceived - but yet still classified as apostate.

So. Here are those verses rearranged:

I think what this means is that things get pretty bad after the abomination of desolation is recognized, persecution reaches unprecedented levels, and the earth is devastated. But after a divinely shortened time of all that going on, the signs will appear - sun, moon, stars, earthquake, waves of the sea - followed almost immediately by the trumpet and the rapture. And after that, the bema seat judgment of Rev 7, where all those just raptured out of trib, and all the other raptured dead of the church age, will then be seen in heaven before the throne, for judgment.

So this makes it seem as though I have made sense of Mark 13 and understand Mark, Matthew, and Luke. But do I? Does Matthew 24 really fit this?

2024 - Not sure where this note belongs...putting it here:

21 And then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'Look, there he is!' do not believe it. 22 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders, to lead astray, if possible, the elect. 23 But be on guard; I have told you all things beforehand. [Mar 13:21-23 ESV]. So back in Mark 13:5 Jesus warns of fake Messiahs and false prophets. In those verses, these are not a sign, they're just the beginning. But here in 21 now, the false christs and prophets will do signs and wonders and those so convincingly that many will be fooled. This is much later in Mark's account, so much later in fact that I believe it is a completely different manifestation of these fakes. This second time IS near the end, this time it IS a sign that these things are about to take place. This second time, the fakes are not to be ignored, they are a sign to run for the hills, to hide, to leave even if you're pregnant. This time they are a sign that things are about to get desperately bad...and that time immediately precedes what? This is after the A of D appears. This is after the worst persecution in history begins. This is after you need the mark to buy and sell. These signs are pre-rapture, not pre-2nd. These are signs of the end of the age...of the end of the church. Never saw this fabulous clue before!

2024 - It has to be right, look at vss 24-27! THEN he will gather his elect. The rapture is AFTER the abomination is recognized, after false prophets fooling even the elect. Such a good time stamp!

2025 - I wonder if the stars falling from heaven are in fact Satan and his angels being thrown out of heaven just before the rapture?

4 His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. [Rev 12:4 ESV]

There is some discussion in my Revelation notes equating angels and stars. A star fell from heaven and was given the key to the bottomless pit comes to mind. That's not a literal star. That is an angel sent for the purpose.

NEXT ITEM,

"26 And then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory." [Mar 13:26 ESV]

"30 Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." [Mat 24:30 ESV]

"27 And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory." [Luk 21:27 ESV]

There can be no doubt that all three of these gospels are talking about exactly the same thing here. And if the same here, then surely the same in each of them in the verse(s) immediately before this. So we have the signs in the heavens, then coming of the Son of Man. BUT we cannot yet be sure if this is the rapture, or the 2nd coming.

These verses go with those above I think.

"16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord." [1Th 4:16-17 ESV]. In the clouds, in the air - NOT at his earthly throne. This is the rapture. On the clouds, NOT on a white horse as in Rev. 19:11, at the second advent.

"39 But he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah." [Mat 12:39 ESV]. The only sign given in the first advent. I note that only Matthew talks about a sign. Mark and Luke just say they will see the Son of Man, not the sign of the Son of Man. But the language in Luke surely ties us right back to Rev. 6:15-17, and so the 6th seal again.

No particular signs precede the appearance of Christ on the white horse in Rev 19 just before he returns to earth with his army. No signs. The signs show up in Rev 6, before what I believe is the rapture. The sign of the Son of Man, and the Son of Man on the clouds with power and great glory, are almost simultaneous in time. That's why the wording is like it is in the three passages.

FINALLY, there is this third item:

"27 And then he will send out the angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven." [Mar 13:27 ESV]

"31 And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." [Mat 24:31 ESV]

"28 Now when these things begin to take place, straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near."" [Luk 21:28 ESV]. Perhaps the most "rapture oriented" of the three.

Here are some relevant verses:

"30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, "Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn."'"" [Mat 13:30 ESV]

"12 His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire."" [Mat 3:12 ESV]

When taken all together like this, I think it is reasonable to see all these verses as references to the rapture. The fact that gathering in is accomplished is the key. At the second coming, he will descend to us, not gather us to him. We go to him in the clouds.

2023 - Mat 13.13 and 3.12, I believe now, are about the time just before the second coming. The seed will have matured. It will be obvious what is wheat and what is weeds. There will be pure good and there will be pure evil and nothing in between. Lines will be drawn. That is what the sheep and goat and the wheat and tares judgment is about. About what you did right there at the end.

2023 - If the rapture is at the sixth seal, and that is where we have the rapture, that is where the greatest tribulation ever known that would have wiped out all mankind is to end with the rapture, then I need the timeline of what happens after that. Because at the instant of the rapture the world will be left with only the lost. Where will the wheat come from? Where the sheep? These must all come post-rapture, from the Jews, starting with the 144,000. The saved Jews will have to get through the trumpets, the thunders, and the bowls, and if they do that, THEN they will be at the sheep and goat as sheep.

(((2022 - I think the above three items are crucial. Find the verses in Revelation that mention these signs. NOTE that there is more than one place. I think stars fall to earth several times. Sun goes dark, not out. Moon goes completely out, stars fall, heaven shaken. Find them all, then show how ONLY ONE of them includes these precise signs.

For the second set, I note that no army is mentioned. Find references to the rapture and see if they mention power and great glory. And find the one about him coming with his army and contrast that with the others.

For the third set, pull in the wheat and tares. In Revelation, at the signs, where is the trumpet? We know from Thess that there will be a trumpet at the rapture.

IF we take these verses as referencing the rapture, then Jesus is not talking at all about his second coming. Why would he "stop" his discourse with the rapture? Because he is speaking of the church age possibly, and not of the final fulfillment of the prophecies to the Jews. Perhaps because the Millennial reign is about the Jews far more than it is about the church. On the Mt of Olives at this time, Jesus is talking to his disciples, NOT to the Jews. The church is founded, and it is the church being addressed.

THIS NEEDS TO BE FILLED ON OUT with additional corroborating scriptures. And if that works out, then perhaps I finally have a consolidated picture of this discourse that integrates Matt, Mark, and Luke all together, all saying the same things.

For now though, in 2022, after about three hours, I am going to go on to the end of this chapter. I put the add'l scripture searches on my calendar so I DO NOT DROP THIS!!!)))))

(((((Came back the same day and filled in the spaces with relevant scriptures. I believe this story - the story of Mark 13, Luke 21, and Matt 24 - is about the time leading up to 70 AD, and then about the end of the church age. I think we mark the end of the church age with the rapture. That is not a bad argument that only the church will be raptured. Some new things came out of this. Great tribulation, as used here, is about the time between revelation of the abomination and the rapture. That is when tribulation will be the worst ever. The time after the rapture is not discussed in any of these accounts because that time is not about the church, but about Israel and the promises. Tribulation during these dark times may well be worse than that experienced by the church here at the end. I would not be surprised to see that also described as the worst tribulation ever. At that time, it certainly will be. Just because we have a superlative stacked right on top of a previous superlative does not make either of them less superlative in their own right. Here is the bad news...I think the church will go through more bad times than I had previously though. More as in we will be here longer. More as in worse than what I previously thought. This is why there are so many warnings to persevere. It is because the persecution will be so massive, prolonged, and unjust. It is no wonder that those living at the rapture get white robes. They will have unfortunately earned every thread.

((((Not sure I agree with this paragraph anymore))))) This is NOT about the rapture. The gathering referred to in these verses is the gathering for the battle, and then the gathering for the Millennial kingdom. It is almost all Jews who will be gathered. Those who've died beforehand will come with him to assume the kingdom, and those who "endure to the end" will be gathered for the battle and to rule and reign with him. It is at this time, that the last of the stones will be thrown down. These stones go back to Solomon, but they were last used as foundation for a temple built by Herod - and evil man at best - and then a temple rebuilt by antichrist and used to worship that evil usurper. (As of 5/11/20, I don't think Antichrist will build a temple on this site. He will build Ezekiel's temple elsewhere.) It seems reasonable that Jesus would destroy that temple - with Antichrist in it perhaps - and start fresh elsewhere. A temple for the nations to worship him, not just for Israel to do so.

Still have to explain vs 30:

30 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. [Mar 13:30 ESV]

The things he is referring to are the darkening of the sun and moon, stars falling, and like that. The generation that sees those signs will also see the Son of Man come with power, and will see the fulfillment of the prophecy that not one stone will be left upon another - which is where this all started. Mark's account doesn't seem as clear as Luke's - it takes more to study it all out, and the transitions are not as obvious - but they do correlate and tie in.

These events will foretell the end, but as to how far out there these things might still be - the first part of the question they asked - only the Father knows. This verse, this admonition:

37 And what I say to you I say to all: Stay awake." [Mar 13:37 ESV]

(Later, 5/11/20) - My "version" of the end times continues to change - I believe to get more accurate as time passes and I study more. There are three questions, and my notes on Matthew 24 I believe explain my position best. I plan to put my "consolidated" interpretation of these questions in the Bible Study section pretty soon. (Later still, 1/1/21 - As of today, my notes on Luke 21 from yesterday are the most current and up to date. But today, I will be looking in detail at this chapter in Mark, and tying the two together where ever possible, identifying places they don't match, and so coming up with a single narrative of ALL that Jesus talked about. Then I'll tie these two in with Matthew, and hopefully have the most complete picture yet. It looks like focusing on the specific questions in each gospel is not as much of a "key" to interpretation as I thought, because the notes above indicate that the "don't come home" imperative was used in Luke 21 of 70 AD, but in Mark 13 of Trib/Great Trib. UNLESS, we say that the statue put in Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes, AE, was what Jesus was talking about in Mark. If so, you get into that whole "repeating of events" scenario, and have your hands full trying to show that the visions of Daniel will either be repeated, or that the first vision was about pre-70 AD, and the second was about Trib/Great Trib???

2022 - We still have to deal with Isa 13 also. I had not found it when made the notes above. Isa 13 is about the destruction of Babylon, in one sense, but also must be about the time in Revelation when Babylon is destroyed. That is in Rev 18,19. IF, as I think right now, the verses above about the signs in heaven portend the rapture, and NOT the final battle after Christ's return, then the verses below need to be explained in that context:

"9 Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger, to make the land a desolation and to destroy its sinners from it.

This does not sound like the joyous day of the rapture. This phrase "the day of the Lord" has to be pinned down. I think it refers to the second coming and the final battle. I think it is a particular, specific, identifiable day. I don't think the day of the Lord is the day of the rapture, so vs 9 is not about the rapture, not about Rev. 6.

10 For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light.

But THIS is the very next verse. This matches Joel, the three gospels, and Rev 6. So...does this tie all that is being said in Isaiah to Rev 6 and so to the rapture - as I understand its timing - or is can I "explain this away"? Look at the next verse:

"11 I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; I will put an end to the pomp of the arrogant, and lay low the pompous pride of the ruthless." [Isa 13:11 ESV]. Does this sound like the rapture? No, I don't think it does. So we have the signs in the heavens, the very familiar signs from Mark 13, Matt 24, and Lk 21, bracketed by descriptions of what seems necessarily to be Armageddon. And just look at the next verse:

12 I will make people more rare than fine gold, and mankind than the gold of Ophir. 13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble, and the earth will be shaken out of its place, at the wrath of the LORD of hosts in the day of his fierce anger." [Isa 13:9-10, 12-13 ESV]

This description goes right along with Jesus saying these things:

"28 Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather." [Mat 24:28 ESV]

"37 And they said to him, "Where, Lord?" He said to them, "Where the corpse is, there the vultures will gather."" [Luk 17:37 ESV]

At that battle, when Jesus comes, a very huge portion of the people who have managed to stay alive to that point will be fighting on the side of the Antichrist. They will ALL be killed. Revelation is very clear. The language about the number of dead from that battle leaves little doubt that most of mankind - other than the converted Jews - will be wiped out.

Looking again at the passages in Matt, Mk, and Lk, that phrase "after that time of tribulation" precedes the signs in heaven. Revelation only mentions these signs at the 6th seal, NOT at the second coming in Rev. 19. BUT, is it ok to say that according to Isaiah, those same signs will appear again just before the day of the Lord? To make the case that I am making, at this point, that is what I am forced to say. I think those vss in Isaiah 13 end as to the day of the Lord at vs 13:13. In vs 14 we return to the prophecy of the fall of old Babylon to the Medes.

Isa 13:1-10 seem to correspond to Joel 2:1-11. The pictures painted, the very words seem certainly to be talking about the same day. The day of the Lord is in view. I think both of these are about Rev 19, the second coming.

Here are some interesting verses for direct comparison:

"6 Wail, for the day of the LORD is near; as destruction from the Almighty it will come!" [Isa 13:6 ESV]

"1 Blow a trumpet in Zion; sound an alarm on my holy mountain! Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble, for the day of the LORD is coming; it is near," [Joe 2:1 ESV]

"7 Therefore all hands will be feeble, and every human heart will melt. 8 They will be dismayed: pangs and agony will seize them; they will be in anguish like a woman in labor. They will look aghast at one another; their faces will be aflame." [Isa 13:7-8 ESV]

"6 Before them peoples are in anguish; all faces grow pale." [Joe 2:6 ESV]

"10 For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light." [Isa 13:10 ESV]

"10 The earth quakes before them; the heavens tremble. The sun and the moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining." [Joe 2:10 ESV]

So. As clear as it is that these signs will appear in Rev 6, and as it is very clear that Rev 6 is NOT about the second coming, and all this destruction and desolation and fire and armies of the Lord DO NOT appear in Rev 6 or following, it is equally clear that these signs will precede the appearance of Christ in Rev 19, when he does come to destroy his enemies and assume the rule of the planet. These signs precede the appearance of Christ - at both the rapture and at the second coming. Why would they not. I don't know why these things are not mentioned in Rev 19, perhaps because they don't need to be. Both Isaiah and Joel - two witnesses to the events of the Day of the Lord - make it clear that they will appear then. Isaiah and Joel didn't know about the church age - or the rapture that ends it, so they wouldn't talk about it. Jesus discourse, recorded in Matt 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, was about the church age, and since the end of that had not been previously described with the signs in heaven, is described in some detail there. We must not mix the events of the rapture with the events of the second advent. They are truly different. AND, it may be that the best way to reconcile all this is to apply the parable of the tares being gathered and burned first, and then the wheat gathered in, to the second coming. The burning is about that Satanic army. They will first be destroyed, burned, and then the faithful Jews will be gathered for the Millennial Reign. Perhaps this is why that parable about wheat and tares is found only in Matt 13:24-30, and nowhere near Matt 24. Because they are about different times.

Here is the tie to Joel, chapter 3, not chapter 2: "13 Put in the sickle, for the harvest is ripe. Go in, tread, for the winepress is full. The vats overflow, for their evil is great. 14 Multitudes, multitudes, in the valley of decision! For the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision." [Joe 3:13-14 ESV]. Joel 3 is about Armageddon. And this comes right after: "15 The sun and the moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining." [Joe 3:15 ESV]. Joel tells us twice that these signs in heaven will precede the second coming.

(So how then, if we know so nearly precisely when it occurs, are we to watch for it so closely? Well...perhaps all those references to the thief in the night and the watching are about the rapture, and not at all about the Day of the Lord? Need to do more research on that. Later...Nope. The "thief in the night" seems to be about Armageddon:

"2 For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night." [1Th 5:2 ESV]

In this passage, Paul surly associates the day of the Lord and the thief in the night. He is trying to motivate the Thessalonians to be faithful. Why would he do this, since they will be long gone before we get to the day of the Lord? But he also says this:

"9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ," [1Th 5:9 ESV]. Surely this is a reference to the fact that Christians will be rapture out BEFORE the day of the Lord.

"10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed." [2Pe 3:10 ESV]

Peter just as surely - in fact more surely - is talking about Revelation 19.)

Here's another reference to the day of the Lord, recognizable by the words used:

"2 "Son of man, prophesy, and say, Thus says the Lord GOD: "Wail, 'Alas for the day!' 3 For the day is near, the day of the LORD is near; it will be a day of clouds, a time of doom for the nations." [Eze 30:2-3 ESV]

A time of doom means Armageddon, not rapture. But nothing in Ezekiel about the signs in heaven.

For good measure, here are more references to the day of the Lord. It is Armageddon, it is not the rapture. It is Revelation 19, it is NOT Revelation 6.

"20 Is not the day of the LORD darkness, and not light, and gloom with no brightness in it?" [Amo 5:20 ESV]

"15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the nations. As you have done, it shall be done to you; your deeds shall return on your own head." [Oba 1:15 ESV]

"7 Be silent before the Lord GOD! For the day of the LORD is near; the LORD has prepared a sacrifice and consecrated his guests. ... 14 The great day of the LORD is near, near and hastening fast; the sound of the day of the LORD is bitter; the mighty man cries aloud there." [Zep 1:7, 14 ESV]

"5 "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes." [Mal 4:5 ESV]

2022 - Vss 32-37 make it clear that the question in Matthew about the end of the age will not be answered. Jesus says that only the Father knows when the end of the age will come. I think this reference is to the end of the world. The end of the Millennial. Sure, all can be backtracked from there, but without knowing when that is, we cannot know when this other is supposed to start. Answering that last question precisely would have answered the others in reverse. So instead, Jesus answers with the signs, and tells us to watch for those, because from those we can deduce the rest.

Pepper's Homepage

Mark 13

Mark Chapter 13