Pemuda Yang Lari Telanjang: Teologi Kesempatan Kedua Dalam Kisah Yohanes Markus

Benediktus James Widya Darmaka; Tjutjun  Setiawan

doi:10.54765/ejurnalkadesi.v8i2.222

Authors

Benediktus James Widya Darmaka STT ANUGRAH INDONESIA
Tjutjun Setiawan STT ANUGRAH INDONESIA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54765/ejurnalkadesi.v8i2.222

Keywords:

Yohanes Markus, Injil Markus, Teologi Kesempatan Kedua, Kegagalan Pemuridan, Narasi Alkitabiah

Abstract

This study examines the theological significance of the young man who fled naked in Mark 14:51-52 and explores the concept of second-chance theology through the life of John Mark. The problem underlying this research is that the brief narrative of the anonymous young man in the Gospel of Mark is often overlooked in biblical interpretation, despite its potential theological implications regarding failure, restoration, and discipleship. The purpose of this study is to analyze the narrative identity of the young man, commonly associated with John Mark, and to investigate how his life trajectory reflects God’s redemptive work through second chances. This research employs a qualitative approach using biblical narrative analysis, literary criticism, and theological reflection based on canonical texts such as Mark 14:51-52, Acts 13:13, Acts 15:36-40, Colossians 4:10, and 2 Timothy 4:11, supported by historical and theological literature. The analysis reveals that the Gospel writer intentionally preserved the embarrassing episode of the fleeing young man as a theological testimony of transformation. The findings indicate that John Mark’s journeyfrom failure in Gethsemane, desertion in missionary work, to restoration and recognition by apostolic leaders—illustrates the dynamic process of spiritual formation through grace and mentorship. The novelty of this research lies in interpreting Mark 14:51-52 not merely as a historical detail but as a narrative self-disclosure that frames the Gospel of Mark within a theology of restoration and second chances. Ultimately, this study concludes that the story of John Mark demonstrates that personal failure does not disqualify individuals from divine calling but may become the starting point of transformative ministry.

References

B, C. P. Cara Pandang Barnabas Si Anak Penghiburan. 02 (2019): 107–24. https://doi.org/10.24071/jt.v8i2.2200.

Buch-Hansen, Gitte, and Frédérik Poulsen. Bibelen i Gudstjenesten. Research Portal Denmark. Technical University of Denmark, 2015. https://local.forskningsportal.dk/local/dki-cgi/ws/cris-link?src=ku&id=ku-610d2aa4-0f60-4533-bc20-d7c58c4275b4&ti=Bibelen%20i%20gudstjenesten.

Byers, Andrew J. “The Genre of Mark’s Gospel Is ‘Gospel’: Reconsidering Literary Innovation in the Markan Incipit.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament, ahead of print, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X231205137.

Collins, Adela Yarbro. Mark: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007.

France, R. T. The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

Francis, Leslie J., Greg Smith, Jonathan Evans, and Leslie Francis. Preaching on the Revised Common Lectionary for the Feast of Christ the King?: Joy for Intuitive Thinking Types , Nightmare for Sensing Feeling Types?? Research Aim. 2021, 1–11.

James, Benediktus, Widya Darmaka, and Drisandri Bidrawati Mooy. CHANGE LEADERSHIP MODEL IN THE BOOK OF NEHEMIAH?: A THEOLOGICAL ANALYSIS AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR CONTEMPORARY. 11, no. 1 (2026).

Johnson, Luke Timothy, and Daniel J. Harrington. The Acts of the Apostles. 1992. http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=016147476&sequence=000002&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA.

Laloan, Rivaldo Joshua, and Mieke Nova Sendow. Paramathetes?: Jurnal Teologi Dan Pendidikan Kristiani Merekonstruksi Kepemimpinan Pelayan Gereja Melalui Kajian Hermeneutik Markus 10?: 35-45 Paramathetes?: Jurnal Teologi Dan Pendidikan Kristiani. 4, no. 1 (2025): 81–99.

Marcus, Joel. Mark 8–16: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Yale Bible 27A. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009.

Marshall, I. Howard, Leon Morris, Colin J. Hemer, T. Clark, and P. Henderson. Acts An Introduction and Commentary. January 1, 1980.

Nersada, Ronald, and Eryono Aulu. Pengorbanan Sejati Sebagai Jalan Rekonsiliasi Dalam Berelasi Dan Berinteraksi?: Suatu Perspektif Teologis-Biblis. 3, no. 1 (2023): 50–65.

Oliver, Willem. Mark the Evangelist?: His African Memory Sources Referring to Mark. 2016, 1–13.

Pabisa, Djonny, Eunike Pratiwi, Pemerintahan Dalam, Negeri Kampus, Sekolah Tinggi, and Teologi Katharos. Relevansi Teologi Misi Kontekstual Paulus Dalam Dinamika Sosial Budaya Kontemporer Berdasarkan Kisah Para Rasul 1). 5, no. June (2024): 89–108. https://doi.org/10.55076/didache.v5i2.216.

Parker, Janise S., Natoya Haskins, Robert A. Whitehead, Brenda Christian, Tamika Jackson, and Anya Ford. “Black Youth Access to Mental and Behavioral Health Care and Academic Support Through E ? Mentoring and a Black Church Partnership.” School Mental Health 17, no. 1 (2025): 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-024-09735-w.

Prakoso, Christian Bayu, and Yonatan Alex Arifianto. Peran Kepemimpinan Misi Paulus Dan Implikasinya Bagi Pemimpin Misi Masa Kini. 4, no. 1 (2020): 67–88.

Samosir, Kelina Sabet, Theophylus Doxa Ziraluo, and Jimmy Sugiarto. Jurnal Pistis?: Teologi Dan Praktika Strategi Pastoral Paulus Dalam Menyelesaikan Konflik. 25, no. 1 (2025): 32–43.

Sinuhaji, Mayesti Latersia, Jon Riahman Sipayung, and Mehamad Wijaya Tarigan. “Studi Historis Kritis Tentang Peran Paulus Di Tengah Konflik Jemaat Menurut 2 Korintus 5:11-21.” Articles. In Theos?: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Theologi 4, no. 10 (September 2024): 377–85. https://doi.org/10.56393/intheos.v4i10.2496.

Venantius, Supriyono. Identitas Fundamental Yesus Menurut Injil Markus. 2, no. 2 (2025): 1–13.

Volume, Perichoresis. THE INDISPENSABLE MARK OF CHRISTIAN LEADERSHIP?: IMPLICATIONS FROM CHRIST ’ S METHODS OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT IN MARK ’ S GOSPEL. 16, no. 3 (2018): 107–17. https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2018-0019.

???. “???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???(? 14:51-52? 16:5) -??? ??, ??? ??, ??? ?????-.” ???? 13, no. 4 (January 2014): 580–609.