(avg. read time: 2–4 mins.)
As is the case with examining most subjects in the Gospels, most of what Mark features on the subject of Jesus’s language of judgment has already been covered in our Synoptic survey. Still, there are a few pieces of text that have not yet been addressed. I will make note of these few features here, even if this will make for one of my shortest entries ever.
First, Mark features a much briefer text on the disciples being sent out than Matthew or Luke in Mark 6:7–13. The disciples are told that any place that does not welcome them and their message should have its dust shaken off of their feet as a testimony against it (6:11). And if the testimony language, itself drawn from the same domain of legal imagery, was not enough to indicate that this mission is related to judgment, one can also see it in how their message is summarized as proclaiming that all should repent (6:12). Of course, this description is reminiscent of how Jesus’s own message is summarized in 1:15.
Second, in another section that otherwise overlaps significantly with Matthew on cutting off sources of temptation, there is one note that is unique to Mark that adds yet more judgment language. Specifically, Mark 9:48 further elaborates on the nature of Gehenna/hell with the note that it is where “their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.” This description is drawn from Isa 66:24, the very end of Isaiah, where it refers to the fate of those who rebelled against God and whose dead bodies are on shameful display. This language accentuates Jesus’s point all the more, as it would be better to enter life maimed then to be thrown in entirety into hell to face destruction and to be put on shameful display, since all will know the outcome of the final judgment.
Third, Mark 11:25 provides another example of Jesus’s teaching on forgiveness in terms of connecting God’s forgiveness to one’s own expression of forgiveness. Some manuscripts also include v. 26, which supplies the typical contrast, whereby the one who does not forgive will not be forgiven. Of course, the fact that it is easier to explain why v. 26 might be inserted at some stage out of a sense of providing completion than it is to explain why it would be intentionally omitted in many other manuscripts provides an indication that we are dealing with a later addition. Still, what we do have with v. 25 fits with what we have seen elsewhere of Jesus’s teaching on forgiveness and how it is inherently tied with judgment. In this case, it is specifically tied with the positive outcome of judgment.
Fourth, one of Jesus’s uses of salvific language in Mark 12:34 is unique to Mark. Here, he tells the scribe who responds to his answer to the question about the greatest commandment that “you are not far from the kingdom of God.” As noted in the first part of this series, the kingdom of God is not something that anyone is in by virtue of birth or natural attribute. It is something people must enter and entrance into the kingdom or the allowance thereof is a function of salvation and judgment. As such, this salvific language relies on the belief in eschatological judgment to make the sense that it does.
Fifth and finally, we return to the Olivet Discourse as Mark relates it in ch. 13. The framing of this discourse in vv. 1–2 indicate that the chapter is at least largely focused on historical judgment against Jerusalem and its temple. This reality of judgment is further attested here by the closing exhortation to be vigilant in vv. 32–37. After all, vigilance is defined in terms of faithfulness until the Son of Man comes. This is made clearer in Matthew and Luke, but it also indicated here in the analogy with the master who leaves for a time, giving his servants charge, each with his own work, until he returns. While the scope of judgment language is generally directed against those who do not follow Jesus in this context, it is important to see how there is still a warning of the possibility of judgment should those who claim to be Jesus’s servants fall asleep on the job.