By: Gen. Jim — 6/28/24
It has been asked why does Mark 14:50-52 speak of “a certain young man following Him (Jesus), having a linen cloth thrown around his naked body. And the young men laid hold of him, and he left the linen cloth and fled from them naked” (NKJV).
This portion of Scripture is being used by the “Christian” homosexuals to prove Jesus had an encounter with this unnamed male. Of course the homosexual movement (HM) has said from the get-go that Jesus was homosexual. These perverts will stop at nothing to try and prove that God does not condemn their sexual ABOMINATIONS!! They also accuse Jesus of being a child predator/pedophile (pedophilia is an abnormal condition in which an adult has a sexual desire for children). They cite Mark 9:36 – “Then He (Jesus) took a little child and set him in the midst of them (disciples). And when He had taken him in His arms…” (NKJV). This is not all, the HM also claims that Jesus was married (two or more wives). They go further and claim that He had sexual relations with Mary Magdalene.
Well, what can we expect coming from the HM except perversions. We, however, do thank God that some among them are coming to grips with their mental illness and repenting. Jesus will receive all those who truly REPENT.
But back to this “naked” guy. Who was he and why is this even mentioned in the unfolding scene: the communion/Lord’s Supper (Mark 14:22-25), the Gethsemane prayer (Mark 14:32-42), the arrival of Judas and the multitude (Mark 14:43-50).
The New Oxford Annotated Bible has a footnote (v.51) which states: “The young man’s identity is not disclosed. Perhaps he was sleeping in the house (when the Last Supper was held) and rose hastily from bed to follow Jesus. If the house was that of Mary, the mother of John Mark (where the disciples met at a later date, see Acts 12:12), it is possible that the young man was the Evangelist himself.”
The question is: Was this male actually naked as the homosexuals believe (Jesus and him had an encounter!).
Another Bible scholar stated:
“Probably raised from sleep by the noise which the rabble made who came to apprehend Jesus, having wrapped the sheet or some of the bed-clothing about him, conspicuous: on his appearing, he was seized; but as they had no way of holding him, but only by the cloth which was wrapped round him, he disengaged himself from that, and so escaped out of their hands. This circumstance is not related by any other of the evangelists.” (One can read “Ward’s Customs” in ref. to clothing and nakedness).
Having been to many countries, one will see just about everything. Nakedness is one of them. But this in no wise infers homosexuality. To say that Jesus had sexual relations with this young man has NO merit whatsoever. In fact, Jesus’ ministry was under the O.T. dispensation where sexual sins were condemned – be they homo or hetero (see Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 et al.).
Jesus was neither a homosexual, child molester or a whore-monger. From what I can dig out, “naked” does not mean without any clothing, but clad in his undergarment or tunic (see John 21:7).
If one cares to research this topic on nakedness, start with Genesis 2:25 where the Hebrew word for “naked” is “awrome” or “arom,” which means “nude, either partially or totally naked.” There is another companion word, “aram,” which means “bare.” We know the Genesis account meant totally naked: “And they (Adam/Eve) were both naked…” (Genesis 2:25/Genesis 3:7).
It depends on the text/context how the word “naked” is used – fully unclothed or nearly naked. There are other Hebrew words for “naked” as well: erom = nudity; para = expose, bare, uncover; maarom = stripping; arah = bare, uncover; uwr = bare, be made naked.
There are dozens and dozens of texts where these Hebrew words are found. The most used are arowm and ervah = nudity (could be without any clothing or very little).
The Greek word for “naked” (Mark 14:52,52 is “gumnos” = nude (absolute or relative, lit. or fig.): “naked.” There is another Greek word (in ref. to our texts) that related: “gumneteuo” = “to strip, i.e. (reflex.) go poorly clad; be naked.” This tells us that the young man was not totally naked/bare but merely had his underclothing on.
(FYI: see Matthew 25:16, 38, 43, 44; Mark 14:51, 52; John 21:7; Acts 19:16; 1 Corinthians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 5:3; Hebrews 4:13; James 2:15; Revelations 3:17, 16:15, 17:16; Romans 8:35; 2 Corinthians 11:27; Revelations 3:18].
Besides Strong’s Concordance, W.E. Vines’ Expository Dictionary of N.T. Words gives us precise meanings for English:
Naked (adj. and verb and noun)
Adjective: Gumnos (γυμνός) signifies (a) unclothed, (Mark 14:52); in v.5 it is used as a noun (“his” and “body” being italicized); (b) scantily or poorly clad, Matthew 25:36, 38, 44; Acts 19:16 (with torn garments): James 2:15; (c) clad in the undergarment only (the outer being laid aside), John 21:7; (d) metaphorically, (1) of a bare seed, 1 Corinthians 15:37; (2) of the soul without the body, 2 Corinthians 5:3; (3) of things exposed to the all seeing eye of God, Hebrews 4:13; (4) of the carnal condition of a local church, Revelations 3:17, (5) of the similar state of an individual, 16:15; (b) of the desolation of religious Babylon, 17:16;
Verb: Gumniteuo, to be naked or scantily clad, 1 Corinthians 4:11. In the Koine writings it is used of being light-armed;
Noun: Gumnotes, is used (a) of want of sufficient clothing, Romans 8:35; 2 Corinthians 11:27; (b) metaphorically, of the nakedness of the body, said of the condition of a local church, Revelations 3:18.
No one I’ve searched out knows who the young man was in Mark 14:50-52 . I really don’t know why these verses were placed there. What I do know is that they are not indicating whatsoever that Jesus and this young male were homo lovers!
Matthew Henry’s Commentary gives a long statement on this subject (see page 1402, IX, 51, 52). In summary, MH says, “This passage is recorded to show what a narrow escape the disciples had of falling into their (mob) hands.” He states that the young man was seized by the mob but escaped by letting them tear off his outer garment.
It matters not if the young man was totally naked before he clothed himself with a sheet or had an undergarment on, the point I make is there is NO connection between Jesus and this person whatsoever. The homosexuals can twist their “pink perversions” all they want but they make Jesus out to be one of them. It was Jesus that quoted Genesis 1:27, “But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female.” Not a hint of a 3rd person (transgender) or of a homo/lesbian. No! It was and still IS, male and female!
There is nothing more we can make of Mark 14:51,52 than the young man went out to see what all the commotion was about, the disciples had fled and the man was grabbed by the mob (thinking he was with Jesus as a disciple), he fled after the mob had pulled off his outer garment (sheet etc.). Nothing more to see here. We reject the silly argument that Jesus had been in bed with this guy. The HM will pervert everything they touch. This is sheer folly!
“Queerocracy” has taken over this nation. The “uglification” can be destroyed by those who will be warriors for righteousness – let’s get to it!!!