One event, four witnesses
The Olivet Discourse
On the Mount of Olives Jesus foretells the destruction of the temple, coming tribulations, and His return. Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 all record this extended teaching, with Luke's language about Jerusalem's fall notably more explicit.
“And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.”Matthew 24:1
“And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!”Mark 13:1
“And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,”Luke 21:5
The event
The event. As Jesus leaves the temple, His disciples point out its great stones and buildings, and He foretells that not one stone will be left upon another. Later, on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, they ask privately when these things will be and what the sign of His coming and of the end of the age will be. Jesus answers with an extended discourse. He warns of deceivers claiming His name, of wars and rumors of wars, famines and earthquakes, the beginning of sorrows. He foretells persecution of His followers, the gospel preached to all nations, and a great tribulation. He speaks of the abomination of desolation and urges those in Judea to flee to the mountains. He warns against false christs and false prophets, then describes the coming of the Son of man in the clouds with power and great glory, gathering His elect. He tells the parable of the fig tree, whose budding signals summer's nearness, and urges watchfulness, since no one knows the day or hour but the Father. The whole discourse binds together the coming judgment on Jerusalem and the certainty of His final return, calling His people to endurance and readiness.
Read side by side: what is the same, what differs
Read side by side: what is the same, what differs. All three Synoptics record the prediction of the temple's destruction, the disciples' question on the Mount of Olives, the warnings of deceivers, wars, famines, earthquakes, persecution, the coming of the Son of man in glory, the parable of the fig tree, and the call to watch. The most noted difference is that Luke's wording about Jerusalem's fall is more explicit and concrete. Where Matthew and Mark speak of the abomination of desolation standing where it ought not, Luke writes plainly of Jerusalem compassed with armies, its desolation drawing near, its people falling by the sword and led captive into all nations, and the city trodden down by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. This is a real difference of emphasis: Luke draws out the historical siege and destruction of the city, while Matthew and Mark preserve the more veiled prophetic language. There is honest and long-standing debate among faithful Christians about how much of the discourse refers to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, how much to the end of the age and Christ's return, and how these two horizons relate, whether the prophecy blends near and far in the manner of the Old Testament prophets. These are questions of interpretation, not conflicts among the accounts. All three agree on the core: judgment is coming, Christ will return in glory, and His people must watch and endure.
What it shows of Christ
What it shows of Christ. Jesus is revealed as the sovereign Lord of history who foretells both the near judgment on Jerusalem and His own glorious return, and whose word stands sure though heaven and earth pass away. He speaks as the prophet greater than all prophets, seeing the end from the beginning, and as the coming Judge, the Son of man who will appear in the clouds with power and gather His elect from the four winds. Matthew, the Gospel of the King, gives the fullest form and adds parables of watchfulness that follow. Mark presses the urgency of vigilance, ending, "What I say unto you I say unto all, Watch." Luke, writing with an eye to the Gentile world, makes plain the coming fall of the city and the times of the Gentiles, showing God's purposes reaching beyond Israel. Above all, Christ calls His people not to speculation but to faithful endurance and readiness, for the One who foretells these things is the same who will return to gather His own.
Questions people ask
Why is Luke's account of Jerusalem's fall more explicit than Matthew's and Mark's?
Luke draws out the historical siege plainly, writing of Jerusalem surrounded by armies, its people led captive, and the city trodden down by the Gentiles, where Matthew and Mark preserve the more veiled prophetic language of the abomination of desolation. This is a difference of emphasis, not of substance; Luke makes the near judgment on the city vivid for his readers, while all three point beyond it to Christ's return.
Does the discourse speak of A.D. 70 or the end of the age?
Faithful Christians have long debated this. Much of the discourse clearly concerns the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and much concerns Christ's final return in glory, and there is honest discussion about how the two horizons relate, whether the prophecy blends near and far as Old Testament prophecy often does. These are questions of interpretation. All three Gospels agree that judgment is coming, that Christ will return, and that His people must watch.