464 Gustavo Martin else in his gospel. This unusual register, a combination of paraenesis and procedural styles, is used by the Markan Jesus to discuss road signs in the near future of his audience, together with the required interpretation and reaction to these road signs. I will show how this register is evident in the language of vv. 5b-23, which includes the discourse peak and specific answer to the disciples’ question, and in the parable of vv. 28-29, but completely absent from vv 24-27. The final section of the speech and the episode as a whole, vv. 28-37 will be shown to be an interpretive key summarizing and distinguishing two distinct temporal horizons and associated required behaviors. We shall then be in a position to appreciate how this speech is “the most coherent of all those attributed to Jesus in Mark” (33). Once the structure and rhetorical arrangement of Mark’s Olivet Discourse are set forth, I will briefly compare them with the parallel passage in Matthew 24 and suggest some conclusions regarding context of situation and dating. 1. Narrative Setting: vv. 1-5a The presence of verbs of movement and the change of localization of v. 1 is characteristic of Markan structuring and indicates the beginning of a new section. The new section starting in 14,1 is signaled by a temporal shift and the re-introduction of characters not mentioned in chapter 13. As I will show below, the speech includes two emphatic colophons, one of which is placed at the very end (v. 37) and clearly marks the end of the discourse. The portrayal of the disciples in Mark is another of the perceived keys to Mark’s overall rhetorical structure in his gospel. This portrayal of the twelve becomes progressively more negative as the narrative advances (34). But, what about Mark 13? Mateos has noted that in the narrative setting section (vv. 1-5a), Jesus is alone described as exiting the temple (v. 1: Kai; ejkporeuomevnou aujtou' ejk tou' iJerou' levgei aujtw'/ ei|" tw'n maqhtw'n aujtou') which is, in his view, an intentional Markan construction showing that while Jesus has left the Jewish institution, (33) YARBRO COLLINS, Mark, 594. (34) T.J. WEEDEN, “The Heresy that Necessitated Mark’s Gospel”, The Interpretation of Mark (ed. W.R. TELFORD) (Philadelphia, PA 1985) 90-91, argues for a progression of the negative portrayal of the disciples. See also in the same volume R.C. TANNEHILL, “The Disciples in Mark”, 169-195; D. RHOADS – J. DEWEY – D. MICHIE (eds.), Mark as Story (Minneapolis, MN 1999) 90-94; 122- 129. See also J. MATEOS, Los “Doce” y Otros Seguidores de Jesús en el Evangelio de Marcos (Madrid 1982).