Exceptional The Destruction Of Jerusalem And The Coming Of The Son: Evangelical Interpretations Of The Olivet Discourse In Luke -- By: Everett Berry
Journal: Southern Baptist Journal of Theology
Volume: SBJT 16:3 (Fall 2012)
Article: Exceptional The Destruction Of Jerusalem And The Coming Of The Son: Evangelical Interpretations Of The Olivet Discourse In Luke
Author: Everett Berry
SBJT 16:3 (Fall 2012) p. 62
Exceptional The Destruction Of Jerusalem And The Coming Of The Son: Evangelical Interpretations Of The Olivet Discourse In Luke
Everett Berry serves as Associate Professor of Theology at the Criswell College.
In addition, he serves as Editor of the Criswell Theological Review. Dr. Berry earned the Ph.D. from The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and in addition to writing numerous scholarly articles, essays, and reviews, has pastored a number of churches in Texas and Kentucky.
The Olivet Discourse stands as one of the most important and exegetically perplexing portions of Jesus’ teachings. All of the Synoptic Gospel writers recount a discourse during Jesus’ final days in Jerusalem where he followed the prophetic lineage of Jeremiah by predicting God’s judgment upon the temple and unrepentant Israel.1 Indeed this was an emotionally charged statement in the ears of his disciples. They were possibly troubled, definitely bewildered, but at the same time intrigued. And Jesus’ response to their question about the timeline of his prophecy has left biblical scholarship with a theological minefield of questions. Many of them are interconnected, simply being different strands of one larger interpretive web. Yet at the risk of being reductionistic, it is possible to compile them into four categories.2
First, the documentary background for the Olivet Discourse demands attention. At this level, we research to discover which Gospel writer may have depended upon the other(s) and/or whether outside sources were used.3 Reasons for these concerns include the fact that Mark’s account appears to be more straightforward while Matthew retains some significant variances including a longer section on his parabolic warnings to his disciples to be ready for his return.4 Also while Luke is more detailed about Jesus’ descriptions of the temple’s fate, many of his comments, which Matthew and Mark mention, are omitted in Luke’s version but are alluded to earlier in his Gospel (e.g., Luke 13:35; 17:20-37; 19:42-44).
Second, its linguistic structure and literary style are subject to scrutiny. Here one must examine the individual presentations intrinsic to each Gospel as well as discern how each one harmonizes to encapsulate the whole scope of the Olivet Discourse. These endeavors must consider the literary nature of prophetic discourse, espec...
Click here to subscribe