We have a larger account given us of our Saviours prayer, See Poole on “Mat 26:39“, and following verses to Mat 26:46. See Poole on “Mar 14:35“, and following verses to Mar 14:42.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

Saying, Father, if thou be willing,…. If it be consistent with thy will of saving sinners, and which thou hast declared to me, and I have undertook to perform: the other evangelists say, “if it be possible”; [See comments on Mt 26:39]

remove this cup from me; meaning, either his present sorrows and distress, or his approaching sufferings and death, which he had in view, or both:

nevertheless not my will; as man, for Christ had an human will distinct from, though not contrary to his divine will:

but thine be done; which Christ undertook, and came into this world to do; and it was his meat and drink to do it, and was the same with his own will, as the Son of God; [See comments on Mt 26:39], and

[See comments on Mt 26:42].

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

If thou be willing ( ). This condition is in the first petition at the start.

Be done (). Present middle imperative, keep on being done, the Father’s will.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1) “Saying, Father, if thou be willing,” (legon pater ei boulei) “Saying repeatedly, Father, if you will, ” or if you are willing, of your choice, but not without your will. For He came not to do His own will, but the will of the Father who sent Him. His will was subservient to His Father’s will, as ours should be, Joh 6:38; Eph 5:17; Rom 12:2.

2) “Remove this cup from me:” (parenegke touto to poterion ap emou) “Take away this cup from me,” this cup of sorrow, suffering, Mat 26:39; Mar 14:36 a; Psa 75:8; as pictured Gen 22:6-8; Heb 5:7.

3) “Nevertheless not my will, but thine be done.” (plen me to thelema mou alla to son ginestho) “However, let not my priority will but yours be done,” occur or come to be, Psa 40:8; Joh 4:34; Joh 6:33; Heb 10:7; Mar 14:36.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

(42) Not my will, but thine, be done.See Notes on Mat. 26:39. Here there is a more distinct echo of the prayer which He had taught His disciples. He, too, could say, Lead us not into temptation, but that prayer was subject, now explicitly, as at all times implicitly, to the antecedent condition that it was in harmony with Thy will be done.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

‘Saying, “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me, nevertheless what I want, but your will be done.” ’

Jesus then addressed His ‘Father’. Writing to Gentiles Luke does not use the Aramaic ‘Abba’ used by Mark, but only the Greek ‘pater’. But note that He begins by subjecting His prayer to the will of the Father. The fact that He is speaking to His Father does not lessen the importance of His Father’s will. It rather enhances it. We too are permitted to approach Him as ‘Our Father in Heaven. But with us also this does not lessen our responsibility to do His will. It rather underlines it.

‘Remove this cup from me.’ Here Jesus had in mind the cup of the Lord’s ‘anger’, the cup of the righteous wrath (or antipathy) of God against sin, the cup of which He had to drink to the full. Others had drunk of such a cup before, but in the past such a cup had always been taken out of the hand of His people by God, once He felt that they had drunk enough (Isa 51:22). And Jesus clearly hoped that this might also be possible for Him. But while the awfulness of what lay before Him made Him shrink from it, He immediately made His request conditional on the Father’s will. For while He shrank from what was in the cup, He would not shrink from the will of God, even if that involved, as it did, the drinking of that cup to the full.

This prayer reminds us again that Jesus had come as one who was truly human, for His words make clear the battle raging within Him. As One Who was holy, and uniquely separated to, and aware of, His Father, and to Whom sin was abhorrent, and to Whom death was a contradiction to all that He was as the Lord of life, He saw before Him the cup of suffering, and forsakenness, and death and His whole being cried out against it. For it not only contained within it for Him an intensity of suffering such as no other man could ever have known, (for they have been involved in sin and death all their lives), but also the personal experience of the antipathy of God (wrath) against sin. This last especially must have torn at the very depths of His righteous and obedient heart.

For these ideas as connected with drinking from a cup see Psa 11:6; Psa 75:8; Isa 51:17; Jer 25:15; Jer 25:17; Jer 25:28; Lam 4:21; Eze 23:31-34; Hab 2:16 see also Rev 14:10; Rev 16:19; Rev 18:6. Psa 75:8 expresses it most vividly, ‘For in the hand of YHWH there is a cup, and the wine is red; it is full of mixture, and He pours out of the same.’ It was the mixture of His terrible judgments on sin, ‘the wine of the wrath of God poured unmixed into the cup of His anger’ (Rev 14:10) and Jesus would have to drink it to the last drop. A similar cup had been the portion of Jerusalem in the midst of the passages about the coming Servant of the Lord. It was a cup which they would truly drink again around thirty or so years later (Isa 51:17).

If we support here the shorter text, and the probability is that we should, while not necessarily doubting that the longer text is based on a valid tradition (or even on a Lucan revision), then this prayer is central in the chiasmus. This is what the agony on the Mount of Olives was all about. We can compare here the words in Heb 5:7, ‘Who in the days of His flesh offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears to Him Who was able to save Him out of death, and was heard for His godly fear’. He shrank from the cup of the antipathy of God against sin, but in the end was willing to drink it to the full. No wonder that He would later feel forsaken. But how then was His prayer heard? By the sustenance given to Him in His manhood to carry it through. For in His godly fear He was strengthened and sustained.

‘Nevertheless not my will, but yours be done.’ Even in His extremity Jesus was concerned more than all else in the will of the Father being done. Jesus was here perfectly exemplifying the prayer that He had taught to His disciples (Mat 6:10; see also Mat 26:42). Whatever it involved it was God’s will that was to be the final arbiter. And it was through this obedience that He would prove Himself to be a sufficient sacrifice for the sins of the world (Heb 10:5-10). He went, not under the compulsion of another, not even of His Father, but as a willing and voluntary sacrifice. The question had been asked long before, “But where is the lamb for a burnt offering?” And the answer had been given, “God will Himself provide the lamb for a burnt offering” (see Gen 22:7-8). And now here He was as the Father’s provision.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Luk 22:42. If thou be willing, remove this cup, &c. Oh that thou wouldst,or, that thou wert willing to remove this cup from me! &c. Blackwall. Our Lord spoke this, not as desirous to be excused from sufferings and death, but in reference to the terror and severity of the combat in which he was now actually engaged. See on Mat 26:39.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

42 Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done.

Ver. 42. lf thou be willing ] He was so astonished with the greatness of his present pressures, that he seems for a time to suffer some kind of forgetfulness of his office.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

42. ] is not to be rendered ‘utinam,’ but ‘ si ,’ and the sentence is broken off at : thus rendering the meaning equivalent to a wish. Some suppose to be an inf. for an imperative , but incorrectly.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Luk 22:42 . , Father! the keynote, a prayer of faith however dire the distress. , etc.: with the reading the sense is simple: if Thou wilt, take away. With or we have a sentence unfinished: “apodosis suppressed by sorrow” (Winer, p. 750), or an infinitive for an imperative (Bengel, etc.). The use of . in the sense of “remove” is somewhat unusual. Hesychius gives as synonyms verbs of the opposite meaning , . The leaves no doubt what is meant. In Lk.’s narrative there is only a single act of prayer. The whole account is mitigated as compared with that in Mt. and Mk. Jesus goes to the accustomed place, craves no sympathy from the three, kneels, utters a single prayer, then returns to the Twelve. With this picture the statement in Luk 22:43-44 is entirely out of harmony.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

if, &c. See App-118.

Thou be willing. -it be Thine intention. Compare App-102.

will = desire. Greek. thelema. Compare App-102. Verses Luk 43:44 are omitted or marked as doubtful by most texts, but the Syriac includes them. See App-94. note.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

42.] is not to be rendered utinam, but si, and the sentence is broken off at : thus rendering the meaning equivalent to a wish. Some suppose to be an inf. for an imperative, but incorrectly.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Luk 22:42. , if thou he willing, remove) The Infinitive put for the Imperative is a frequent usage of the Greeks. See note on Rev 10:9.[246] And in this passage, indeed, such an Enallage (or change of mood and tense) expresses the reverential modesty of Jesus towards the Father. But in this passage, if we suppose an aposiopesis of the verb [and make the Infin. after , this feeling of reverential modesty will be still more expressively conveyed.

[246] The Infinitive expressing the absolute idea of the verb, irrespective of the particular relations of mood and tense, tends to impart the feeling of majesty to the language when used for the Imperative; especially when God speaks. It was often used archaically for the Imperative, and also for the Imperfect Indicative, in both Latin and Greek.-E. and T.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

cup

(See Scofield “Mat 26:39”).

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

Father: Mat 26:42, Mat 26:44, Mar 14:36, Joh 12:27, Joh 12:28

willing, remove: Gr. willing to remove

cup: Luk 22:17-20, Isa 51:17, Isa 51:22, Jer 25:15, Mat 20:22, Joh 18:11

not: Psa 40:8, Joh 4:34, Joh 5:30, Joh 6:38, Heb 10:7-10

Reciprocal: Mat 26:39 – and prayed Mar 10:38 – drink of the Act 21:14 – The will Rom 8:15 – Abba Gal 1:4 – according Heb 5:7 – in that he feared

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Luk 22:42. Father, etc. Godet: Luke, like Mark, gives only the first prayer, and confines himself to indicating the others summarily, while Matthew introduces us more profoundly to the progressive steps in the submission of Jesus.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament