[corrected version]
This paper argues that the portrayal of the Parousia in Mark’s Gospel has multi-faceted implications for his theology of discipleship. The introductory section will demonstrate that the Olivet Discourse in Mark 13 and the rest of the narrative indeed include abundant references to Christ’s return (contra Wright; cf. France) and will also provide foundational exegetical observations on the passages to be discussed subsequently.
The main section of the paper will, then, present the Parousia’s implications for the theology of discipleship in Mark’s narrative in close interaction with Bayer (2022), Henderson (2006), Best (1981), and Mills & Carter (2016), among others.
First, Mark’s juxtaposition of the Parousia with the fall of Jerusalem within the Olivet Discourse (see, e.g., 13:28-31[29]) promotes the disciples’ assurance of their Messiah’s promised return in the specific sense that the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy about the Temple destruction (vv. 1-23) guarantees the realization of his future return (vv. 24-27, vv. 32-37).
Second, the unknowability of the Parousia’s timing (13:32) mandates vigilance on the part of the disciples (v. 37; cf. 14:34). This particular point is supported by the fact that the motifs of ignorance and alertness are bound with each other repeatedly within the concluding passage of the Olivet Discourse (13:32-37).
Third, the strategic location of the most significant Parousia text in Mark’s narrative (i.e., 13:24-37), immediately before the passion narrative (Mark 14-15), exhorts the disciples to embrace the suffering and hardship that they must undergo for their faith in Jesus the Messiah (8:34)—with his glorious return (8:38; 13:26; 14:62) in view and the unfolding eschatological reversal (10:31, vv. 43-44; 12:18-27) in mind. This third point is reinforced by (i) that the most Parousia-like event in Mark’s narrative (i.e., the Transfiguration of Jesus) is situated in the very middle of the three-fold passion prediction cycle (8:27-10:45) and, more specifically, between the first and second passion prophecies (8:31 and 9:31) and also by (ii) that the epithet “the Son of Man,” i.e., Jesus’ favorite Christological title, facilitates the integration of the emphases on the suffering and future glory with each other (see, e.g., chaps 14-15).
Fourth, the overall eschatological shape of Mark’s Gospel, especially when coupled with the penetration of the “Kingdom” motif across the narrative, implies that disciples’ lifestyle should reflect such eschatological intensity.
Fifth and last, the four points noted above must be considered jointly and collectively in that the related emphases appear concurrently within the macro-text (i.e., Mark’s narrative) and are inseparably bound with one another in Mark’s theology of discipleship.
This paper contributes to the discussion of the Parousia components in Mark’s Gospel especially by linking them to the theology of discipleship in the Second Gospel.