Mark 14:51
And there followed him a certain young man.
J. C. RYLE (1816-1900): Mark is the only evangelist who relates this circumstance: and he has given us no clue to further knowledge as to who it was, or why the event is mentioned.
C. H. SPURGEON (1834-1892): One wonders why it is introduced, but a moment’s reflection will, I think, suggest a plausible reason.
ALEXANDER MacLAREN (1826-1910): Only he tells the incident, which has no bearing on the course of events, and was of no importance but to the person concerned.
C. H. SPURGEON: It strikes me that this “certain young man” was none other than Mark himself—I grant it is merely a supposition, yet it is supported by the strongest chain of probabilities. The only person likely to know it, was the man himself. I cannot think anyone else would have been likely to tell it to Mark—for he might scarcely have thought it worthy of recording if it had been told him by someone else! And it is not likely that anyone to whom it had occurred would have felt it was much to his credit, and been likely to relate it to Mark with a view to its being recorded!
THE EDITOR: It’s possible one other person knew about it.
C. H. SPURGEON: Who was that?
THE EDITOR: Peter. He also followed the mob as they led Jesus away, though “afar off,” Mark 14:53,54. That very minute detail explains why this young man was spotted; he was closer to the mob, while Peter was afar off, and not seen in the darkness. But how could Mark come to be in Gethsemane that night?
J. C. RYLE: Theophylact and Buthymius think it probable that it was some young man who followed our Lord from the house where He ate the Passover with His disciples.
THE EDITOR: That’s very possible. Jesus observed the Passover in a “large upper room,” Mark 14:15. Mark’s mother owned a house in Jerusalem with a large room; eleven years later, after an angel freed Peter from Herod’s prison, Peter went to her house “where many gathered together praying,” Acts 12:12.
MATTHEW HENRY (1662-1714): Mary was a sister of Barnabas, and mother of Mark, whose house, it should seem, was frequently made use of for the private meeting of the disciples.
THE EDITOR: Quite likely, this was the same “upper room” to which the apostles returned from Mount Olivet after Christ’s ascension, and where they “abode” and held prayer meetings; what more appropriate place to gather together than where they had observed the Lord’s Supper? It was also likely the “one place” where they gathered on Pentecost, when the Spirit descended—compare Acts 1:12-15 & Acts 2:1. Why else would the Holy Spirit include those very minute details? He doesn’t inspire words to be recorded on a whim, to no purpose. “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times,” Psalm 12:6.
A. W. PINK (1886-1952): No detail in Scripture is meaningless.
THE EDITOR: But that’s not all. Notice the method our Lord used to direct Peter and John to where they prepared the Passover, Luke 22:8. “And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him. And wheresoever he shall go in, say ye to the goodman of the house, The Master saith, Where is the guest chamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? And he will shew you a large upper room furnished and prepared: there make ready for us. And his disciples went forth, and came into the city, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover. And in the evening he cometh with the twelve,” Mark 14:13-15.
ALEXANDER MacLAREN: The remarkable thing here is the picture it gives of Christ elaborately adopting precautions to conceal the place. What is the reason? To baffle the traitor Judas by preventing him from acquiring previous knowledge of the place. He was watching for some quiet hour in Jerusalem to take Jesus, Mark 14:10,11. So Christ does not eat the Passover at the house of any well-known disciple who had a house in Jerusalem, but goes to some man unknown to the Apostolic circle, and takes steps to prevent the place being known beforehand.
THE EDITOR: Exactly. The Greek word translated as “goodman” means “the head of a family.” I believe this particular “goodman” was the husband of Mark’s mother. This Passover was in A.D. 33; however, Peter’s imprisonment, with its reference to “Mark’s mother’s house,” was in A.D. 44, which suggests that Mark’s father had died by then. Other references tend to confirm that. Mark’s uncle’s name was actually Joses; but because of his habit of consoling others, he “was surnamed Barnabas, which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,” Acts 4:36. Barnabas certainly had a strong fatherly care for his nephew; after Mark’s father died, Barnabas likely took young Mark under his protective wing; thus his advocacy for Mark in his later dispute with Paul, Acts 15:36-40. And later, in A.D. 60, Peter refers to Mark as “Marcus, my son,” 1 Peter 5:13; Peter also had a deep fatherly affection for him.
ADAM CLARKE (1760-1832): He is called Peter’s son, Peter having been likely the means of his conversion. This is very probable, as Peter seems to have been intimate at his mother’s house.
JOHN GILL (1697-1771): Peter was either an instrument of converting him, or of instructing him, or Mark was one that was as dear to him as a son; in like manner as Paul calls Timothy, and also Titus, his own son.
THE EDITOR: This brings us to Mark’s age at the time of Christ’s arrest.
C. H. MACKINTOSH (1820-1896): How can we know that?
THE EDITOR: We can’t, not precisely. But in 45 A.D., when Barnabas and Paul took Mark along on their first missionary journey, as “their minister,”—or their servant, he was training for the ministry, Acts 13:4; just as a young Elisha had served Elijah, in training for his own later ministry, 1 Kings 19:19-21; 2 Kings 2:1-15. Scripturally, Levites didn’t begin their public ministry until age thirty, Numbers 4:3, as did Christ Himself, Luke 3:23. If Mark was thirty in A.D. 45, or being still only a servant, perhaps yet in his twenties, then when Jesus was arrested in A.D. 33, Mark was eighteen, maybe even younger, and likely living with his parents. Tradition puts Mark born in A.D. 12, but I prefer the sufficiency of Scriptural reasoning.
THOMAS MANTON (1620-1677): Nothing is more profitable to dissolve doubts and objections raised from Scripture, than to compare one Scripture with another. For Scripture is not opposite to Scripture. There is a fair agreement and harmony between the truths therein compared—one place doth not cross another, but clear and explain another.
ALEXANDER MacLAREN: Probably, this young man was Mark.
C. H. SPURGEON: There is no other hypothesis in favour of any other man that is supported by equal probabilities. Very well, then. We will assume that he was the man and use the incident as the groundwork of our discourse.
THE EDITOR: Next week, let’s see what we might learn from that probability.
