Ads


Sign up for our
Email Newsletter

What Jesus Prayed for in the Garden

“My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not as I will, but as you will,” prays Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane. Many sermons and commentaries take Jesus’ prayer to be a prayer to the Father to avoid the cross, “if it is possible.” This displays his true humanity. After all, the thought goes, which of us when faced with the excruciating trial of the cross and separation from God would not pray the same prayer?


To be sure, I accept Jesus as fully human (as well as fully divine). I have no desire to minimize his humanity. But I don’t think that Jesus’ humanity rides on reading the Gethsemane passages as Jesus asking to escape the cross and God the Father answering with a “no.”


James R. RogersThe exchange in this reading of the texts—that Jesus asks to be spared the cross and the Father says no—just doesn’t make sense to me.


There are a couple of reasons for my skepticism. First is that an early commentator, no less than the author of the book of Hebrews, suggests that the Father answered Jesus’ Gethsemane prayers in the affirmative: “In the days of his flesh, he offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the one able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his piety.”


The author of Hebrews must be mistaken if the common take on Jesus’ Gethsemane prayers is correct, and Jesus asked to be spared the cross. After all, the author writes that God “heard” Jesus’ prayer. Yet Jesus went to the cross and in fact died.


The author of Hebrews suggests another reading of Jesus’ prayer, however, a reading in which the Father responds in the affirmative to his prayer, thereby “sav[ing] him from death,” even though Jesus went to the cross and died. The author of Hebrews does not have Jesus asking God the Father to be spared from the cross. Rather the author has Jesus’ prayer to be a request to be resurrected after dying on the cross. And that prayer the Father answers with a dramatic affirmative.


Do the Gospels support the reading of Hebrews’ author? I want to return to the texts to see if we can read them likewise. Before considering them, though, I want to note a couple of other items that would also make it problematic to read Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane as a request to escape the cross.


For example, in the Gospel of Matthew, after Jesus tells the disciples that he “must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things . . . and be killed, and be raised up on the third day,” Peter takes him aside and rebukes him, wanting instead that God would be “merciful” to him. To this benign wish, Jesus responds to Peter with the bracing retort, “Get thee behind me, Satan.” Implicit in Peter’s desire for mercy is that Jesus would avoid the cross, and in that very desire, according to Jesus’ response, is satanic temptation. Yet this common reading of Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane would have Jesus asking God the Father for the same thing that he rebuked Peter for wishing.


In the Book of John, Jesus expressly rejects the idea that he would ask God the Father to be spared from the cross: “Now my soul has become troubled; and what shall I say, ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I came to this hour.” N. T. Wright’s complaints about Christians too easily skipping from Jesus’ birth to his death not withstanding, Jesus basically says, “How can I pray to be saved from this hour, since this hour is the purpose for which I came?”


While this is in John’s Gospel and not in the synoptics, the conventional view requires Jesus several hours later to ask the Father what he says in John that he would not ask the Father.


So, too, later in John, Jesus reaffirms his mission: “Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) So Jesus said to Peter, ‘Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?’”


But given these texts, is there a reasonable way to understand Jesus’ petitions in the garden that is consistent with the commentary in the book of Hebrews and the upshot of these other texts?


As I mentioned, I think the author of Hebrews orients us to the resurrection in writing that Jesus prayed to “the one able to save him from death” and that Jesus was “heard because of his piety.” The salvation from death that the author writes of in this passage is salvation from eternal death; the salvation from death is not that Jesus wouldn’t die at all, but that he would be brought back to life after he dies.


How would this affect how we read these Gethsemane accounts in the synoptic Gospels? Jesus’ prayer that the cup pass away would not a prayer that he not drink of the cup at all. Rather, it is a prayer that he not drink of the cup eternallyi.e., that he would be resurrected after the cross.
The cup is the cup of judgment (recall the cup of God’s wrath in Revelation).


An interpretation consistent with the claim of the author of Hebrews—that Jesus was not asking to avoid the cup altogether—would seem to be suggested in Matthew’s account, which reports that Jesus prays, “My father, if [or perhaps “since”] this cannot pass away until I drink it, your will be done.”
This is a prayer that the cup of judgment pass away after Jesus drinks it. It is a prayer not to have to drink of the cup forever; it is not a prayer to avoid the cup altogether.


I don’t think that praying this prayer makes Jesus any less human. If God was going to reckon me as very sin, curse, and death, I’d certainly be praying that the judgment not continue eternally. The thing is, however, that on this reading, Jesus is willing to undergo eternal separation from his Father to save his people, if that in fact is his Father’s will. But the Father did not desire it. Instead, Jesus tasted death for all humanity, then was resurrected. The Father said “yes” to Jesus’ prayer, and the cup passed away.


James R. Rogers is department head and associate professor of political science at Texas A&M University. He leads the “New Man” prison ministry at the Hamilton Unit in Bryan, Texas, and serves on the Board of Directors for the Texas District of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here.


Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.

Comments:

3.19.2013 | 2:27am
C. Simon says:
A sober reading of Peter's confession cannot have Peter "wishing" for Jesus to avoid the cross by God's mercy. That Peter did not have God's things in mind---least of all God's mercy, the thing to which Christ is supposed to have appealed in Gethsemene---is proved by Jesus' reply, "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."
3.19.2013 | 3:19am
The Church Fathers seem to have made it quite clear that an essential aspect of Christ's humanity is the very real fear he had of the physical cup he was about to undergo:

St. John Chrysostom's words, for example:

"And He prays with earnestness, in order that the thing might not seem to be acting. And sweats flow over him for the same cause again, even that the heretics might not say this, that He acts the agony. Therefore there is a sweat like drops of blood, and an angel appeared strengthening Him, and a thousand sure signs of fear, lest any one should affirm the words to be feigned. For this cause also was this prayer. By saying then, “If it be possible, let it pass from me,” He showed His humanity; but by saying, “Nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou wilt,” He showed His virtue and self-command, teaching us even when nature pulls us back, to follow God."

Or again, St. Justin Martyr:

"His heart and also His bones trembling; His heart being like wax melting in His belly: in order that we may perceive that the Father wished His Son really to undergo such sufferings for our sakes, and may not say that He, being the Son of God, did not feel what was happening to Him and inflicted on Him."

And yet again, Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria

"And accordingly, as by the intensity of the supplication and the severe agony, so also by the dense and excessive sweat, he made the facts patent, that the Saviour was man by nature and in reality, and not in mere semblance and appearance, and that He was subject to all the innocent sensibilities natural to men."
3.19.2013 | 10:02am
Pope Benedict spoke to this topic:

Jesus continues his prayer: “Abba, Father, all things are possible to you; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what you will” (Mk 14:36). In this invocation there are three revealing passages. At the beginning we have the double use the word with which Jesus addresses God: “Abba! Father!” (Mk 14:36a). We know well that the Aramaic word Abbà is the term that children use to address their father and hence that it expresses Jesus’ relationship with God, a relationship of tenderness, affection, trust and abandonment.

The second element is found in the central part of the invocation: awareness of the Father’s omnipotence: “all things are possible to you”, which introduces a request in which, once again, the drama of Jesus’ human will appears as he faces death and evil: “remove this cup from me!”.

However, there is the third expression in Jesus’ prayer, and it is the crucial one, in which the human will adheres to the divine will without reserve. In fact, Jesus ends by saying forcefully: “yet not what I will but what you will” (Mk 14:36c). In the unity of the divine person of the Son, the human will finds its complete fulfilment in the total abandonment of the I to the You of the Father, called Abba.

The complete text can be found here:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2012/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20120201_en.html
3.19.2013 | 10:25am
Bob K says:
Is the cup that Jesus is referring to the cup of Judgment? Isn't that the second cup of the Passover meal, and wouldn't it have already been consumed in the Upper Room?
3.19.2013 | 11:34am
Patrick says:
This is a fascinating essay built on a questionable premise, it seems to me, because James Rogers assumes more than the author of the Letter to the Hebrews may have intended.

The verse that Rogers quotes makes clear that the prayer of Jesus was heard, but it hardly seems a reach to think that a request may be heard and then answered either affirmatively or negatively. Rogers is at pains to make the beginnings of a case for an affirmative response, but surely God can answer prayers with "Yes," "No," or "Not yet."

Whatever Jesus asked in the Garden of Gethsemene or elsewhere, we also know that the keystone of His prayer -- indeed, of His life -- was and is perfect conformity to the divine will.
3.19.2013 | 12:16pm
Michael S. says:
This article speaks deeply to all Christians who will face suffering for proclaiming what is true. And the struggle to move forward or back away from what is true. The previous article about James Berry in Kentucky, where I reside, contains further proof of the serious societal stigma that Christians are and will face ("the lowest form of hatred!!!!). It is clear that we may lose our jobs or be rejected by those we love. Recently, a Christian friend of nineteen years was on the verge of kicking me out of his house because of my defense of the Church's stance on homosexuality. Even his seventeen year old daughter, who over heard our discussion, exhibited fury toward me. Needless to say, this experience, which occurred a few weeks ago, has shaken me to the core. It's one thing to speak the truth in love, it is another dimension of higher reality, to suffer persecution.
I understand Jesus' wavering, if that be the case, because I am "counting the cost"
that will result from speaking the truth in love.
However, considering the depth of suffering I see around me via close friends who struggle with deep pain because of life long polio and another in a wheel chair for two decades and his two daughters recently leaving the faith, my real and potential suffering is not, at the present time, in the same universe. God Bless
3.19.2013 | 1:18pm
Michael S,

Jesus knew that those who followed Him would be persecuted:

And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake (Matthew 10:22)

I have seen Catholics abandon the truth and even leave the Church due to their 'conversion' to the currently popular stance on homosexuality. All we can do is to pray for each other, for them, and try to continue to educate our brothers and sisters who have fallen away.
3.19.2013 | 3:43pm
C Kennedy says:
Interesting angle - very thought provoking.

I do have one reservation however with the nature of the "cup". You state that "The cup is the cup of judgment (recall the cup of God’s wrath in Revelation)."

One small isse though. Reading Matthew 20:17-23 "17And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside, and on the way he said to them,

18Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death,

19and deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked and scourged and crucified, and he will be raised on the third day."

20Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came up to him, with her sons, and kneeling before him she asked him for something.

21And he said to her, "What do you want?" She said to him, "Command that these two sons of mine may sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your kingdom."

22But Jesus answered, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?" They said to him, "We are able."

23He said to them, "You will drink my cup, but to sit at my right hand and at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father."

How can the "cup" that Jesus is talking about in the Garden be the cup of God's wrath if the disciples will also drink from it? Seems more likely that this cup is one of suffering (unjustly) at the hands of the authorities - as was eventually the case for most of the apostles. No mention of God's wrath here.

but otherwise, I think you may be on to something here....
3.19.2013 | 4:48pm
Don Roberto says:
As with everything in scripture, especially in the Gospel, the words convey a rich texture of thought. They invite and inspire meditation and their depths will not be plumbed before the last day. I often think that in addition to the truly terrible physical pain, Jesus torment included his perfect empathy for His holy mother’s pain and that of His friends. And His anticipation of the dreadful sins of the people who were caught up in the lies of the evil one, which in a sense are from all time focused into that moment, must have been unbearable to contemplate. †
3.19.2013 | 5:30pm
Don Roberto says:
I will pray for you, Mr. S. It is *amazing* how people let Hollywood and the crowd (popular opinion) shape their beliefs. (The older lemmings, like Wendell Berry, are willing to forget/refute not just the morality of their own ancestors back to time immemorial, but their own earlier thoughts on the subject.) Just as a majority of pre-WWII Germans allowed Goebbels to shape theirs. Just as the Israelites in Jesus' time were goaded by their leaders into committing the greatest sin in history. Despite how obviously wrong it is to do so (because redefining marriage will profoundly damage society by undermining one off its most crucial underpinnings and lead countless innocent astray).

God grant you strength. Remember that your reward will be great.
3.19.2013 | 7:44pm
A.M. says:
According Bl.Emmerich , what The Lord was experiencing was the normal aversion of human nature to suffering , this multiplied by the vision and agony of the suffering experienced through sin , in the lives of all of humanity .

Remebrance of His suffering enables us to repent for and on behalf of all in our lives , for all its pains , all the way from Adam and Eve .

Thus, a person who is in prison now , who got started on that path , because of the abuse suffered as a child, with its lingering pain , can join The Lord , telling Him , how he repents for the pain it caused The Lord , who does forgive all who has been the cause of such to Him ; thus , the person accepts that forgiveness and extends it to the offender, thus to be set free from the prison of hatred and self pity .
3.19.2013 | 9:08pm
There seems to be an obvious mistake being made here. Was not the final request made by Jesus ("not my will but your will be done") also part of his prayer? Of course it was. And as the wording of it shows, it takes precedence over what went before. So there is no inconsistency between the traditional interpretation and the statement in the Letter to Hebrews. Jesus was heard and the Father's will was indeed done just as Jesus asked that it be.

Moreover, it is not tenable that Jesus was asking to be saved from eternal death, that is damnation, because Jesus was the Second Person of the Trinity. The idea that God could be damned is a contradiction in terms. Though Christ had two natures, he was one Person and that Person a divine Person. The idea that God could be eternally separated from God in Hell is nonsensical. Or if it is meant that Christ's human soul would be cast into Hell and thus separated from God (as if the Hypostatic Union could be undone), that too makes no sense.

This shows the danger of picking through biblical texts and trying to construct doctrine from scratch, especially when the results go against the massive testimony of tradition.
3.19.2013 | 9:37pm
The late Clifton L. Fowler, President Emeritus then of Denver Bible Institute, published a 30-page pamphlet on this topic in 1940, with the thesis that what the Lord sought in prayer in the garden, and was heard, was to escape a Satan-produced premature death there in Gethsemane. He also refers to two men who held the same view in 1916, Robert E. Speer, then secretary of the Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions, and Dr. W. H. Griffith Thomas, of Wycliffe College, Toronto. Dr. Thomas endorsed the view of Dr. Speer, and credited Dr. H. C. Trumbull of teaching it to them both.
3.20.2013 | 2:26pm
David Huston says:
Great insight Dr. Barr et al., even in our fallen state! That means, "we" individuals who still necessarily must "see through a glass darkly," for the time being; however, we've somehow neglected to include a tremendous amount of critical text in the OT - a literal prophetic trail-of-a-"jigsaw puzzle," commencing at the outset of the proverbial "fall," as seen in Genesis 3:15, plus throughout the rest of O.T. Scripture - whereby we find what's been called "Intra-Trinitarian dialogue," whose content from "their" mysteriously eternal perspective uttered in, by and through the Holy Spirit Himself (or Ruach HaKodesh), had the entire situation under total control, in time-space-dimension history, regarding the resurrected/glorified "Lamb slain before time began."
(Revelation 13:8)

See also, in this context, Psalm 2; 16:9-10; 22; 24; 72; 110; 132 & and several more; also Jesus' veiled reference to His temporary time in Hades (e.g., Psalm 16:9-10 & 1Peter 3:18-19) found in Matthew 12:38-40; plus the Apostle Peter's classic Holy Spirit-inspired/illuminated powerful exposition of the Hebrew Bible, delivered on Pentecost, in Acts chapter 2....where "three-thousand souls were saved" that day!

Can't say anymore...because trying to avoid censorship for Protestant biblical fundamentalists on this site, is always a challenge! God bless y'all!
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact