The final section of the Olivet discourse begins with a declaration of Jesus, “ ‘No

one knows about that day or hour.’ ” The original Greek begins with an explicit
adversative that is not translated in the NIV: “ ‘But concerning that day.… ’ ” This sets v.
32 in contrast to the preceding subject of “these things,” that is, the fall of Jerusalem.
“Day” and “hour” are often charged with eschatological meaning in the Bible.50 “That
day” is coordinate to “those days” of vv. 17, 19, 20, and 24, and thus reintroduces the
theme of the Parousia of vv. 14–27. The end, however, is shrouded in mystery, for “ ‘not
even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father’ ” knows the Parousia.51
13:32 has been a stumbling block in the church since at least the second century.52
Conservatives have either questioned or rejected its authenticity because it ascribes
ignorance to Jesus; and liberals have done the same because it attests to Jesus’
consciousness of his divine Sonship.53 The fact remains, however, that the early church is
scarcely likely to have attributed a saying to Jesus that ascribes ignorance to him.54 The
saying lays the highest possible claim to have come from Jesus and to represent his
mind.55 The “Son” is properly understood as Son of God rather than Son of Man since the
latter does not occur in the Gospels in an absolute sense (i.e., “the Son”), whereas “Son of
God” is used absolutely (e.g., Matt 11:27//Luke 10:22).56 “The Son,” which stands
correlative to “Father,” means “the Father’s Son,” or the Son of God.
This verse contains an amazing paradox. Here the bold assertion of divine Sonship is
yoked to the unlikely limitation of ignorance. In this the only passage in the Gospel of
Mark where Jesus explicitly calls himself “the Son,” he admits to what he does not know
and cannot do. This irony is, to be sure, very much in accord with Mark’s portrayal of
Jesus as the Son, for Jesus does not claim the prerogatives of divine Sonship apart from
complete obedience to the Father’s will but rather forsakes claims and calculations in
favor of humble confidence in the Father’s will. Equally ironic is the fact that the Son,
unlike the disciples, relinquishes all claims concerning the future into the Father’s plan.
The disciples want an “It” — a sign; Jesus wants a “Thou” — the Father. In these two
ironies — Jesus’ acceptance of his human limitation and his full relinquishment of the
future into the Father’s hand — the divine Sonship is not something that sets Jesus apart
from humanity but binds him to humanity as an example to follow.57 The effect of v. 32
thus directs attention exclusively to the Father, for “only the Father knows about that day
or hour” (Acts 1:7). In the midst of calamity and destruction, tribulation and persecution,
when even the sun, moon, and stars are shaken (vv. 24–25), the believer may rest assured
that God is still Father, and as Father he remains steadfast in his just will, compassion,
and purpose.