36<\/strong>. Abba<\/em> ] St Mark alone has preserved for us this word. St Peter could not fail to have treasured up the words of murmured anguish, which, “ about a stone’s throw<\/em> ” apart, he may have caught before he was overpowered with slumber. It is used only twice more in the New Testament, and both times by St Paul, Rom 8:15<\/span>, “we have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father<\/em> ” and Gal 4:6<\/span>, “God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father<\/em>.” In Syriac it is said to have been pronounced with a double b<\/em> when applied to a spiritual father, with a single b<\/em> when used in its natural sense. With the double letter at all events it has passed into the European languages, as an ecclesiastical term, ‘abbas,’ ‘abbot.’ See Canon Lightfoot on Gal 4:6<\/span>.<\/p>\n Father<\/em> ] St Mark adds this probably to explain the Aramaic word, after his wont.<\/p>\n Verse 36. Abba, Father<\/B><\/I>] This Syriac word, which intimates filial affection<\/I> and respect<\/I>, and parental tenderness<\/I>, seems to have been used by our blessed Lord merely considered as man<\/I>, to show his complete submission to his Father’s will, and the tender affection which he was conscious his Father had for him, [Syriac] Abba<\/I>, Syriac, is here joined to , Greek, both signifying father<\/I>; so St. Paul, Ro 8:15<\/span>; Ga 4:6<\/span>. The reason is, that from the time in which the Jews became conversant with the Greek language, by means of the Septuagint version and their commerce with the Roman and Greek provinces, they often intermingled Greek and Roman words with their own language. There is the fullest evidence of this fact in the earliest writings of the Jews; and they often add a word of the same meaning in Greek to their own term; such as , Mori<\/I>, my Lord, Lord<\/I>; , pili, , shuar, gate, gate<\/I>: and above, , , father, father<\/I>: see several examples in Schoettgen.<\/I> The words and appear to have been differently used among the Hebrews; the first Abbi<\/I>, was a term of civil<\/I> respect; the second, Abba<\/I>, a term of filial<\/I> affection. Hence, Abba, Abbi<\/I>, as in the Syriac version in this place, may be considered as expressing, My Lord, my Father<\/I>. And in this sense St. Paul is to be understood in the places referred to above. See Lightfoot<\/I>.<\/P><\/p>\n And he said, Abba, Father<\/strong>,…. In the original text, the former of these is a Syriac word, and the latter a Greek one, explanative of the former, as in Ro 8:15<\/span> and Ga 4:6<\/span> or the repetition is made, to express the vehemency of his affection, and his strong confidence in God, as his Father, amidst his distress, as the Syriac version renders it, , “Abba, my Father”: or “my Father, my Father”; and so the Ethiopic version:<\/p>\n all things are possible unto thee<\/strong>; so Philo the Jew b, taking notice of Isaac’s question about the burnt offering, and Abraham’s answer to it, represents the latter as adding, in confirmation of it,<\/p>\n “all things are possible to God, and which are both difficult and impossible to be done by men;”<\/p>\n suggesting, that God could easily provide a lamb for a sacrifice; and Christ here intimates, that every thing consistent with his perfections, counsels, and covenant, were possible to be done by him; and how far what he prays for, was agreeable to these, he submits to him, and to his sovereign will:<\/p>\n take away this cup from me; nevertheless, not what I will, but what thou wilt<\/strong>: [See comments on Mt 26:39]<\/span>.<\/p>\n b De Abrahamo, p. 374.<\/p>\n Abba, Father <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Both Aramaic and Greek and the article with each. This is not a case of translation, but the use of both terms as is Ga 4:6<\/span>, a probable memory of Paul’s childhood prayers. About “the cup” see on Mt 26:39<\/span>. It is not possible to take the language of Jesus as fear that he might die before he came to the Cross. He was heard (Heb 5:7f.<\/span>) and helped to submit to the Father’s will as he does instantly.<\/P> Not what I will <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Matthew has “as” (<\/SPAN><\/span>). We see the humanity of Jesus in its fulness both in the Temptations and in Gethsemane, but without sin each time. And this was the severest of all the temptations, to draw back from the Cross. The victory over self brought surrender to the Father’s will. <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And He said, Abba, Father,”<\/strong> (kai elegan abba ho pater) “And He said (prayed)Abba Father,” affectionately, “0 my Father,” Mat 26:39<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “All things are possible unto thee;-<\/strong> (panta dunta soi) “All things are possible to you,” Mar 10:27<\/span>, all things that are in the realm or in harmony with your will. Then, 0 how the love of God is there shown! Joh 3:16<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3) “Take away this cup from me:-<\/strong> (parenegke to poterion touto ap’ hemou) “Remove this cup from me: The humanly dreaded experience of Jesus is called “this cup.” The “hour” and the “cup” are both terms adopted by Jesus to convey the idea of His approaching sacrificial. and substitutionary death, Mat 20:22<\/span>; Joh 18:11<\/span>; Isa 53:46<\/span>; 1Pe 2:24<\/span>. He was not a mere victim of men’s hatred, or God’s will, for He gave His life voluntarily, of His own choice or volition, Joh 10:17-18<\/span>; Luk 23:46<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “Nevertheless not what I will,”<\/strong> (all’ ou ti ego thelo) “But not what I will,” in isolation from your will, to make my soul an offering for sin, Isa 53:10<\/span>; Isa 53:12<\/span>; Php_2:8.<\/p>\n 5) “But what thou wilt.”<\/strong> (a I la ti su)”But what you will to be or to do,” and as you have promised to do in your covenant-integrity, Mat 26:39<\/span>; Joh 4:34<\/span>; as prophesied Psa 40:7-8<\/span>; Heb 10:7<\/span>.<\/p>\n (36) And he said, Abba, Father.<\/strong>The record of the word Abba as actually uttered, is peculiar to St. Mark. We, perhaps, find traces of the impression it made on the minds of men in the Abba, Father of Rom. 8:15<\/span>, Gal. 4:6<\/span>.<\/p>\n 36<\/strong>. <\/strong> Abba, Father <\/em> The word Abba <\/em> signifies father <\/em> in the Syriac, which was the dialect that our Saviour spoke. In that section of country where both Hebrew and Greek were spoken by the people, it was sometimes customary to give both the Hebrew and the Greek words, one to explain the other. Similar was the custom of bestowing upon the same individual both a Hebrew and Greek name.<\/p>\n 34 And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 35 And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n 36 And he said, Abba, Father, all things are<\/em> possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n Ver. 36. Abba, Father<\/strong> ] Father, Father, with greatest earnestness. This was an effectual prayer, had he said no more. God can feel breath in prayer,Lam 3:56<\/span>Lam 3:56<\/span> .<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Not what I will, but, &c.<\/strong> ] Aposiopesis emphatica, <\/em> saith Beza. <\/p>\n 36.<\/strong> ] <\/strong> = , an Aramaic form, and after Mark’s manner inserted, as ‘Ephphatha,’ ch. Mar 7:34<\/span> , ‘Talitha cum,’ ch. Mar 5:41<\/span> .<\/p>\n <\/strong> is not the interpretation of <\/strong> ,<\/strong> but came to be attached to it in one phrase<\/em> , as a form of address: see reff. Meyer rightly supplies the ellipsis after <\/strong> : nevertheless,<\/strong> the question is not<\/em> : not , which would not come into construction with .<\/p>\n Mar 14:36<\/span> . : in the parallels simply . In the Apostolic Church the use of the double appellation among Gentile Christians was common ( vide<\/em> Rom 8:15<\/span> , Gal 4:6<\/span> ), having become a proper name and being added as its interpretation = God our Father. Mk. imparts into the prayer of our Lord this apostolic usage. Jesus doubtless would use only one of the names, probably the Aramaic. . . ., remove this cup; equivalent to in Mar 14:35<\/span> (Luk 22:42<\/span> ). , etc.; “ but<\/em> not what ( for ) I will, but what Thou”; elliptical but clear and expressive: or (not which would demand before ) is understood ( vide<\/em> Holtzmann, H. C., and Weiss in Meyer).<\/p>\n Abba. Aramaic for Father. Occurs only here, Rom 8:15, and Gal 1:4, Gal 1:6 . See App-94. <\/p>\n (Hebrew. ‘ab.) Father. App-98. <\/p>\n will . . . wilt. Greek. thelo. App-102. 1, <\/p>\n 36.] = , an Aramaic form, and after Marks manner inserted, as Ephphatha, ch. Mar 7:34,-Talitha cum, ch. Mar 5:41.<\/p>\n is not the interpretation of , but came to be attached to it in one phrase, as a form of address: see reff. Meyer rightly supplies the ellipsis after : nevertheless, the question is not : not , which would not come into construction with .<\/p>\n Mar 14:36. , Abba Father) Mark seems to have added Father, by way of interpretation: For Matthew, ch. Mat 26:39; Mat 26:42, says that what was said by Jesus was simply, My Father: Luke, Father, Mat 22:42. on the cross, He said Eli, Eli.-, what) The question in the case, saith He, is not what I will, but what Thou wilt.<\/p>\n cup <\/p>\n See note on the meaning of the cup. (See Scofield “Mat 26:39”). <\/p>\n The Prayer in Gethsemane<\/p>\n And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me: howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt.Mar 14:36.<\/p>\n At the close of his account of the Temptation, St. Luke tells us that then the devil left our Lord for a season. Doubtless there was no time throughout His lifewhich indeed was one victory over evilin which that great adversary left Him wholly unassailed; but the words lead us to look for some special manifestation of his malice,some sequel to his first desperate attempt,some last struggle with his Conqueror. Nor is the expectation vain. The Agony in the garden is in many respects the natural correlative to the Temptation. In this we see Christs human will proved to be in perfect harmony with the righteous will of God, just as in that His sense and soul and spirit were found subjected to the higher laws of life and devotion and providence. The points of similarity between them are numerous and striking. The Temptation occurred directly after the public recognition of our Lords Messiahship at His Baptism: the Agony was separated only by a few days from His triumphal entry into the Holy City. The Temptation preceded the active work of our Lords prophetic ministry: the Agony ushered in the final scenes of His priestly offering. The Temptation was endured in the savage wastes of the wilderness: the Agony in the silent shades of the night. Thrice under various pleas did Satan dare to approach the Saviour: thrice now does the Saviour approach His Father with a prayer of unutterable depth. When the Temptation was over, angels came and ministered to Him who had met Satan face to face: during the Agony an angel was seen strengthening Him who fought with death, knowing all its terrors. But there are also differences between the two events which give to each their peculiar meaning and importance for us, though they are thus intimately connected. At the first our Lord was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted: at the last He retired into the garden to seek the presence of God. At the first He went alone to meet mans enemy: at the last He takes with Him three loved disciples to watch and pray while He approaches His Father. At the first Satan lures Him to gratify each element of His nature: at the last he endeavours to oppress Him by fear. At the first our Lord repels the Tempter with the language of invincible majesty: at the last He seems to sink under a burdenlike the cross which He soon carriedtoo heavy for Him to bear.<\/p>\n The prayer contains:<\/p>\n I.His Assurance of the Fathers Ability<\/p>\n II.His Petition<\/p>\n III.His Acceptance of the Fathers Will<\/p>\n It is introduced by the invocation, Abba, Father; and it leads to a consideration of Christ in Prayer.<\/p>\n The Invocation<\/p>\n Abba, Father.<\/p>\n 1. The combination, Abba, Father, occurs three times in the New Testament, with a meaning which is the same every time but is not fully understood until the three occasions are studied separately and then brought together. The three occasions are these: (1) By Jesus in Gethsemane. The words are: And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me: howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt (Mar 14:36). (2) By St. Paul, in writing to the Galatians. The words are: But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that he might redeem them which were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father (Gal 4:4-6). (3) By St. Paul, to the Romans. The words are: For ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father. The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are children of God: and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him (Rom 8:15-17).<\/p>\n Take the thoughts in order<\/p>\n (1) Here are all the persons concerned in redemption: (a) the Father, to whom the cry is made; (b) the Son, who makes the cry for Himself in Gethsemane; (c) the Spirit of the Son, who makes it in the heart of the other sons; (d) the sons themselves, who, under the power of the Spirit, cry, Abba, Father.<\/p>\n (2) The cry is the cry of a son to a father. That in every case is the whole point and meaning of it. In one case it is the cry of the Only-begotten Son; in the other cases it is the cry of the adopted sons. But it is always the cry of a son who has the heart of a son. An adopted son might not have the heart of a son. But in each case here the Father says, My beloved son; and the son responds, crying, Abba, Father.<\/p>\n (3) The true heart of a son, whereby we cry, Abba, Father, is due to the gift of the Spirit. Look at St. Pauls argument to the Galatians. There he states two things: first, that when the fulness of time came, God sent forth His Son into the world; second, that because we are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts.1 [Note: Expository Times, xx. 358.] <\/p>\n 2. Our Lords appeal to God as Father was evidence that He was not, even then, forsaken in His humanity. He experienced the deep depression, the spiritual eclipse, the midnight darkness, under which we may speak as if utterly desolate. But a, feeling of forsakenness is no proof of the reality. As the sun is not altered when eclipsed, so God was as near in Gethsemane as on the Mount of Transfiguration. The Sufferer expressed this confidence when calling on Him as Father. God has forsaken no one who utters this cry. The appeal is the response to His own call. If as a child I say, My Father, He as Father has already said, My child. Mourning after an absent God is an evidence of love as strong as rejoicing in a present one.<\/p>\n Speak to me, my God;<\/p>\n And let me know the living Father cares<\/p>\n For me, even me; for this one of His choice.<\/p>\n Hast Thou no word for me? I am Thy thought.<\/p>\n God, let Thy mighty heart beat into mine,<\/p>\n And let mine answer as a pulse to Thine.<\/p>\n See, I am low; yea, very low; but Thou<\/p>\n Art high, and Thou canst lift me up to Thee.<\/p>\n I am a child, a fool before Thee, God;<\/p>\n But Thou hast made my weakness as my strength.<\/p>\n I am an emptiness for Thee to fill;<\/p>\n My soul, a cavern for Thy sea.<\/p>\n Thou makest me long, I said, therefore wilt give;<\/p>\n My longing is Thy promise, O my God.1 [Note: George Macdonald.] <\/p>\n I<\/p>\n His Assurance of the Fathers Ability<\/p>\n All things are possible unto thee.<\/p>\n The words are without reservation and they must be accepted unreservedly. All things are possible to God always. There is no question of His power under any circumstances. The only question is as to His will. All things are possible unto thee.<\/p>\n It was so with our Lord on earth. If thou wilt, said the leper, thou canst make me clean. His answer was, I will. Whereupon the leprosy departed from the man.<\/p>\n This is a most comfortable doctrine. There is nothing impossible with God. We never have to do with a baffled, helpless God. He is always able. And so, as the only doubt we can ever have about Him is His willingness, we know that whatever we do not receive is something that would not be good for us to receive. For we know that His will is to do us good. We know that He will never withhold any good thing from them that love Him.<\/p>\n The cup which was put into the hands of our Lord in Gethsemane was so bitter that if He had not known absolutely that all things are possible to God, He would have thought that the Father could not help offering it. And that is actually how we look upon it. There was no other way, we say. We limit Gods resources. We curtail Gods power. We may say that there was no better way; for that is self-evident. He took this way of redeeming us because it was the best waythe way of love. But if it were not that His will always is for the bestthe best for us and the best for our Saviourwho can tell that He would not have chosen another way than this strange way of agony and bitter tears?<\/p>\n It was the best way for our Saviour. When He was able to say, Not my will but thine, He entered into rest. He despised the shame. And it is the best way for us. Father, if it be possible, we say. But let us never, never end with that. For it is possible if it is His will. Let us always addNevertheless, not my will but thine be done.<\/p>\n II<\/p>\n His Petition<\/p>\n Remove this cup from me.<\/p>\n What was the Cup? In considering this question, says E. L. Hull, we have to take account of two things at the outset:<\/p>\n (1) On the one hand, we must never forget that the suffering of Christ is a mystery too profound for us ever fully to understand. The very fact that the Divine One could suffer is, in itself, beyond our comprehension. The fact that Christs sufferings were vicarious, invests them with still deeper darkness. That in Christ the Divine was manifested in a human form, and was thus connected with the human, is the source of the profoundest mystery in His sufferings. We know that in man the soul and body mysteriously affect each other; that the agony of the spirit will, by some inexplicable method, shatter the material frame; but what effect the manifestation of Divinity had on a frail human body we can never understand. Thus it must not be forgotten that the sufferings of Christ as the Divine Man are veiled in impenetrable darkness, and form a subject which must be approached with deepest awe. The man who boldly speculates on this has lost all reverence, while he who stands before it in reverential love will be able partly to comprehend its mystery.<\/p>\n (2) The second point is, that while the sufferings of Christ are awfully mysterious, we may obtain some dim insight into their character and source by considering that, though Divine, Christ was also perfectly humansubject to all the sinless laws of our nature. We are spirits in human forms; we know how the spiritual can suffer in the material, and have thus one requisite for forming a feeble conception of the source of the Saviours sufferings.<\/p>\n Luther was once questioned at table concerning the bloody sweat and the other deep spiritual sufferings which Christ endured in the Garden. Then he said: No man can know or conceive what that anguish must have been. If any man began even to experience such suffering, he must die. You know many do die of sickness of heart! for heart-anguish is indeed death. If a man could feel such anguish and distress as Christ felt, it would be impossible for him to endure it, and for his soul to remain in his body. Soul and body would part. To Christ alone was this agony possible, and it wrung from Him sweat which was as great drops of blood. 1 [Note: Watchwords from Luther, 17.] <\/p>\n 1. Was the Cup the physical pain of His sufferings? He endured physical anguish to a degree inconceivable by us; for if it be true that the more sensitive the spirit the more it weakens the bodily framethat intense and protracted thought diminishes its vigourthat mental labours waste its energy and render it susceptible of the keenest suffering, then we may well suppose that Christ in the agony of the garden and the cross endured physical suffering to an inconceivable degree. But apart from the frequent occasions on which He showed that His spirit was troubled, we may perhaps perceive that bodily suffering was not the chief source of His sorrow, from one fact, namely, that physical suffering is endurable, and by itself would not have overwhelmed Him. Man can bear bodily anguish to almost any degree. Granting the consciousness of rectitude, you can devise no pain which cannot be borne by some men.<\/p>\n I have been struck lately, in reading works by some writers who belong to the Romish Church, with the marvellous love which they have towards the Lord Jesus Christ. I did think, at one time, that it could not be possible for any to be saved in that Church; but, often, after I have risen from reading the books of these holy men, and have felt myself to be quite a dwarf by their side, I have said, Yes, despite their errors, these men must have been taught of the Holy Spirit. Notwithstanding all the evils of which they have drunk so deeply, I am quite certain that they must have had fellowship with Jesus, or else they could not have written as they did. Such writers are few and far between; but there is a remnant according to the election of grace even in the midst of that apostate Church. Looking at a book by one of them the other day, I met with this remarkable expression, Shall that body, which has a thorn-crowned Head, have delicate, pain-fearing members? God forbid! That remark went straight to my heart at once.1 [Note: C. H. Spurgeon.] <\/p>\n 2. Was the Cup the fear of Death? We cannot conceive that the overwhelming sorrow of Jesus arose from the prospect of His approaching dissolution. For the suffering of men through fear of death may be ascribed to two causes,either the sense of sin, or a doubt regarding the nature of the future life. We can well conceive how a man who has a half dread lest death may be the extinction of being, or who knows not whether futurity will bring him blessedness or woe, should be overcome with a strange horror of dying. To such a man the uncertainty is terrible, as he feels death may be but the escape from ills that are bearable to ills that may be infinite. But we cannot suppose that anything like doubt or a fear of the change of death for one moment overshadowed Jesus Christ. For, take one illustration out of many, and compare the language of Christ with that of the apostle Paul in prospect of dying, and we shall perceive that dread of the mere change of death could not have affected Jesus. Paul on the very threshold of martyrdom wrote, I am ready to be offered.<\/p>\n Celsus and Julian the Apostate contrasted Jesus, sorrowing and trembling in the garden, with Socrates, the hero of the poison cup, and with other heroes of antiquity, greatly, of course, to the disadvantage of the former. Why, then, said Celsus, scornfully alluding to Jesus conflict in the garden, does He supplicate help, and bewail Himself and pray for escape from the fear of death, expressing Himself in terms like these, O Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me? The Emperor Julian, quoted by Theodore of Mopsuestia, uses, if possible, still more scornful language: Jesus presents such petitions as a wretched mortal would offer when unable to bear a calamity with serenity, and although Divine, He is strengthened by an angel. To these heathen philosophers Jesus, trembling and agonised in Gethsemane, seemed to come far short of the great men of classic antiquity.1 [Note: A. B. Cameron.] <\/p>\n Whence did the martyrs draw their fortitude? Where did they find their strength to meet death so bravely? Why could they look the great enemy in the face without flinching, even when he wore his grimmest aspect? They were strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. His example was before them, His spirit within them, His face above them. They saw Him standing at the right hand of God, the Victor in His glory. They knew Him as the conqueror of death and the great ravisher of the power of the grave. They passed into the valley treading in the footprints He had left; they looked up through its darkness at their Leader on the mountain-top. The Breaker had gone up before them, leaving the gates open for them to pass through.2 [Note: G. A. Sowter.] <\/p>\n Thus every where we find our suffering God,<\/p>\n And where He trod<\/p>\n May set our steps: the Cross on Calvary<\/p>\n Uplifted high<\/p>\n Beams on the martyr host, a beacon light<\/p>\n In open fight.<\/p>\n To the still wrestlings of the lonely heart<\/p>\n He doth impart<\/p>\n The virtue of His midnight agony,<\/p>\n When none was nigh,<\/p>\n Save God and one good angel, to assuage<\/p>\n The tempests rage.<\/p>\n Mortal! if life smile on thee, and thou find<\/p>\n All to thy mind,<\/p>\n Think, who did once from Heaven to Hell descend<\/p>\n Thee to befriend;<\/p>\n So shalt Thou dare forego, at His dear call,<\/p>\n Thy best, thine all.<\/p>\n O Father! not my will, but Thine be done<\/p>\n So spake the Son.<\/p>\n Be this our charm, mellowing earths ruder noise<\/p>\n Of griefs and joys;<\/p>\n That we may cling for ever to Thy breast<\/p>\n In perfect rest!1 [Note: J. Keble, The Christian Year, 85.] <\/p>\n 3. There are several ingredients in the Cup. They may not be all equally evident, and when we have considered them all we may still be far from the bottom of this mystery of mysteries. But it is helpful to consider them, if it is done reverently and self-reproachfully.<\/p>\n (1) The Cup was the necessity of coming into closest relations with sinners, the exceeding guilt of whose sin He alone was able to understand. Like the dwellers in a city slum, they were unaware of the foul air they were breathing, they were ignorant of the uncleanness of their lives. He came from the purity and holiness of Gods throne. How could He breathe in this atmosphere? How could He touch these defiled garments? Yet He must come into the very midst of it. His sympathy for the sinner is not less than His loathing for the sin.<\/p>\n We know that the sympathy which a human spirit has with man is in proportion to the magnitude of that spirits powers, and the depth of its emotional nature. It is impossible for a human soul to sympathise with all humanity, but the men of greatest genius and profoundest feeling have the strongest sympathy with the race. Men of feebler and narrower natures care but little for those beyond the circle of their own friends, while the heart of the patriot beats in sympathy with the sorrows of a nation and measures the wrongs of an age. Christs sympathy as the Divine Son of Man was wide as the world. On all who lived then, on the men of the past, on the generations of the future, He looked. For all He felt. The pity of the Infinite One throbbed in His heart. To His ear the great cry of the world was audible, and to His eye all the woes of humanity were clear. Rise a step higher, and consider that Jesus saw the deep connection between suffering and sinsaw men being driven like slaves in the chains that connect the sin with the suffering, and at the same time blinded by their own evil. He saw in sorrow more than sorrow. Every tear of the weeping world and every death that broke the fair companionships of earth, touched His sympathy, not simply by their agony, but because they were the fruits of sin. Here we find the meaning of the sighing and sadness with which He looked on suffering, for, while He denounced the narrow notion that each mans suffering springs from his own sin, yet suffering and death were to Him the signs of mans universal wandering from God. Rise one step highera mighty step, yet one the extent of which we may faintly apprehend. Christ knew the power of sin just because He was free from it. He entered into the very awfulness of transgression because of His perfect sympathy with man. Does this seem perplexing? Do we not know that the purest and most compassionate men ever have the keenest perception of the sins of their brethren, and feel them like a burden on their own hearts? Must not Christ, the Perfect One, have felt the evil of the worlds sin, as it pressed against His soul, most profoundly because He was sinless?1 [Note: E. L. Hull.] <\/p>\n (2) This Cup of suffering was embittered by the behaviour of those for whom He was suffering. As the wretched victims of debauchery will sometimes refuse the sympathy and help of those who seek to restore them to a better life, so Christ was despised and rejected by those whom He desired to redeem. The Gentiles crucified Him; the rulers of His people condemned Him to death; His disciples forsook Him and fled; one of them betrayed Him. He that ate bread with Him lifted up his heel against Him.<\/p>\n This is a grief which strikes deeply and keenly into the soul, in proportion to its own elevation and purity. Such souls care not for the opposition and for the obloquy of the stranger, or the worldly, or of those from whom nothing better can be expected. But the real keen and piercing grief of noble minds is when they feel that the familiar friend in whom they trusted has turned against them, that the leader and companion on whom they leaned, as on a part of themselves, has given way. This is, indeed, agony. Of all the dreadful experiences of human life is not this one of the darkest, the moment when the truth may have first flashed upon us that some steadfast character on whom we relied has broken in our hand; that in some fine spirit whom we deeply admired has been disclosed a yawning cavern of sin and wickedness? Such was His feeling when He saw that Judas could no more be trusted; when He saw that Peter and James and John, instead of watching round Him, had sunk into a deep slumberWhat, could ye not watch with me one hour?<\/p>\n (3) This want of understanding of even His own disciples drove Him into a solitude that at such a time and to such a nature must have been very hard to bear. Notice the words, He went a little further. Do you not already feel the awful loneliness conveyed by these words: the sense of separation, the sense of solitude? Jesus is approaching the solemn climax of His life, and as He draws near to it the solitude deepens. He has long since left the home of His mother and His brethren, and will see it no more. He has but recently left the sacred home of Bethany, that haven of peace where He has often rested, and where the hands of Mary have anointed Him against His burial. He has even now left the chamber of the Paschal supper, and the seal of finality has been put upon His earthly ministry in the drinking of the cup when He said to His disciples, Remember me. He has just left eight of His disciples at the outer gate of Gethsemane, saying, Stay ye here while I go and pray yonder. A few moments later, and He parts from Peter and James and John, saying, Tarry ye here and watch with me, and He went a little further. It was but a stones throw, says St. Luke, and yet an infinite gulf now lay between Him and them.<\/p>\n This loneliness of life in its common forms we all know something about. We know, for instance, that the parting of friends is one of the commonest experiences of life. People come into our lives for a time; they seem inseparable from us, and then by force of circumstances or by some slowly widening difference of temper or opinion, or by one of those many social forms of separation of which life is full, they slowly drift out of our touch and our life. We must part, as all human creatures have parted, wrote Dean Swift to Alexander Pope, and there is no sadder sentence than that in human biography. It strikes upon the ear like a knell.1 [Note: W. J. Dawson.] <\/p>\n But no boldness of thought and no heroism of conduct will ever be possible to us until we have learned to stand alone and to go a little further. You remember that the favourite lines of General Gordon, which he often quoted in those splendid lonely days at Khartoum, were the lines taken from Brownings Paracelsus<\/p>\n I see my way as birds their trackless way.<\/p>\n I shall arrive! what time, what circuit first,<\/p>\n I ask not: but unless God send His hail<\/p>\n Or blinding fireballs, sleet or stifling snow,<\/p>\n In some time, His good time, I shall arrive:<\/p>\n He guides me and the bird.<\/p>\n 4. But there is a greater sorrow here. In some way, mysterious but most assured, He had to make the guilt of the sin of mankind His own. He had to take the sinners placehis place as a sinnerand accept the burden of his sinfulness. His agony becomes intelligible only when we accept His own explanation of all His suffering and woe, that He had come to give His life a ransom for many, and to shed His blood for the remission of their sins. In other words, He had come to make the sins of others His own, and to suffer and die as if He had committed them, and as if the guilt and the penalty of them were His.<\/p>\n How Jesus could assume and have this personal relation to sins not His own is the real mystery here. It must ever be, like much else in His Divine human being, largely beyond our finite thought. It goes so far to explain it that He was the Son of Man, and that in this unique character He could be for men what no other could possibly be. As the God-man He was related to humanity, to its burden and its destiny, as no other could be. He was its head and representative. As such He could, while sinless Himself, make the sin, the agony, and the conflict of our fallen race His own. The suffering and the death which this involved He as the second Adam underwent, not for His own sake, but for the sake of humanity, that all might issue in salvation. Thus far the Incarnation throws light upon Gethsemane and Calvary. It did not merely add another to the number of our race, but it gave a new Divine centre or head to it, and one in whose personal history the agony and conflict of humanity because of sin might be endured and brought to the victory of redemption.<\/p>\n It affords us, also, a new revelation of God, showing Him in the glory of His grace. We can understand charity and self-denying beneficence meeting the results of evil in this worldthe poverty, misery, and suffering it has causedwith their bounty and all the services and forms of self-sacrifice possible to them; but here is philanthropy on the Son of Mans part going so far as to deal with the evil itself and all its demerit and guiltiness, its relations to the moral order of the universe, and to the claims and glory of God. For Divine love to relate itself to human need and suffering, and to multiply its offices of charity in relieving them is a great thing; but for Divine love to clothe itself with the shame and guilt of the sufferers and make their cause its own is another and an infinitely greater thing. For Gods Son to come into the midst of suffering men that He might share their ills and sorrows, and provide them with comforts and abatements, would reveal a beautiful compassion and beneficence. But for Him to descend from His Divine throne, step into the sinners place, and suffer Himself to be numbered with the transgressors, bearing their burden and blamethis is grace beyond all we can conceive of grace.<\/p>\n 5. But what is it that makes it so hard for Him to have to take the sinners place? It is that the sinner is an outcast from God. Sin has broken the communion. And now He who was spoken of as the beloved Son has to bear the Fathers displeasure and feel the unutterable pain of separation. No wonder He prayed, Father, glorify thou me with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. For that glory was to be loved by the Father: For thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. The Father loves Him still and will glorify Him again. But now He feels that He is about to be separated. One with the sinner in his sin, He must feel that He is separate from the Father in His holiness. The Agony in the Garden is the cry on the crossMy God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? It casts its dark shadow before. If He accepts the Cup now He will go through it all, even though when the moment comes that cry may yet be wrung from Him.<\/p>\n Imagine the evil of the world being felt by Him as a mighty burden, and that feeling gathering and deepening until over His frail humanity it rolled like a flood,the sense of the worlds sin cleaving to Him, the sense of the worlds woe rousing Him to compassion till its mighty mass seemed to be tearing Him from God, and the awful cry came at last, Why hast thou forsaken me? Add to this the mystery of His Divinitythe Divine capacity of sorrow within the human formand who can tell what suffering His soul knew? Who can tell the horror of darkness and the shuddering agony of pity that thrilled Him as the cry burst forth, O my Father, let this cup pass from me?<\/p>\n To bear the weight of sin, and by it to feel cut off from the communion with God which is Life Eternalthis is the one thing absolutely unbearable. We sinners know it, if ever we have felt what men call remorse for our own sin, or for its consequences, which we would give worlds to undoif ever we know what it is to struggle with all our might against the bondage of conscious sinfulness, and to struggle in vain. The sense that sin has gained an absolute mastery over us, and that in the darkness of its bondage Gods face of love is hidden from us for ever, and the unwilling terrors of His wrath let loose upon our unsheltered headswhich of us would not count light in comparison the very keenest agony of body and soul? You remember how St. Paul cries out under it, O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? But this sense of our own sin is but a faint shadow of the burden on our Lords spirit of bearing, in the mysterious power of Atonement, the sins of the whole worldmade (as St. Paul boldly expresses it) sin for us, entering even into the spiritual darkness which cries out, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?1 [Note: Bishop Barry.] <\/p>\n Into the woods my Master went,<\/p>\n Clean forspent, forspent;<\/p>\n Into the woods my Master came,<\/p>\n Forspent with love and shame.<\/p>\n But the olives they were not blind to Him,<\/p>\n The little grey leaves were kind to Him,<\/p>\n When into the woods He came.<\/p>\n Out of the woods my Master went,<\/p>\n And He was well content;<\/p>\n Out of the woods my Master came,<\/p>\n Content with death and shame.<\/p>\n When death and shame would woo Him last,<\/p>\n From under the trees they drew Him last;<\/p>\n Twas on a tree they slew Himlast<\/p>\n When out of the woods He came.2 [Note: Sidney Lanier.] <\/p>\n III<\/p>\n His Acceptance of the Fathers Will<\/p>\n Howbeit not what I will, but what thou wilt.<\/p>\n 1. Not what I will.It was His meat and drink, as He Himself has told us, to do His Fathers will and to finish His work. We can understand Him doing the will of His Father with gladness when, in accordance with it, He had miracles to perform, Divine blessings to spread abroad, and His own perfectly pure and good life to live. We can also understand Him bravely doing it when, with His soul which loathed evil and every kind of wrong, He bore up unflinchingly against the wrongs and the evils with which He was Himself assailed. But Jesus subjection went far beyond this when He took the cross from His Fathers hand, and meekly said as He did so in Gethsemane, Not what I will, but what thou wilt.<\/p>\n The consent of His will was absolutely necessary. So He said Himself of His life, I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. That consent, again, was needed at every point. At any moment His own words might have been realised, Cannot I pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? That consent, further, had to be given under a perfect fore-knowledge of all that it impliedevery pang of suffering, every cruelty of triumphant evil. In these points, as in all others, His was the one perfect sacrifice, laying a will, itself absolutely free, at the feet of His Father. Doubtless we may follow Himwe must follow Himbut it is afar off.<\/p>\n We read of a martyr of the English Reformation, before whose eyes at the stake was held up the pardon which awaited his recantation; and who cried out in an agony which he found fiercer than the fire itself, If ye love my soul, away with it. And the secret of such agony, as also the essence of sacrifice, lies in the submission of the willin the subjection of that mysterious power, which in man, weak and finite as he is, can be (so God wills it) overcome by no force except its own. Sacrifice and burnt offering thou wouldest not. Then said I, Lo! I come to do thy will, O God. I am content to do it.1 [Note: Bishop Barry.] <\/p>\n What a contrast within the space of a few hours! What a transition from the quiet elevation of that, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father! I will, to that falling on the ground and crying in agony, My Father! not what I will. In the one we see the High Priest within the veil in His all-prevailing intercession; in the other, the sacrifice on the altar opening the way through the rent veil. The high-priestly Father! I will, in order of time precedes the sacrificial Father! not what I will; but this was only by anticipation, to show what the intercession would be when once the sacrifice was brought. In reality it was that prayer at the altar, Father! not what I will, in which the prayer before the throne, Father! I will, had its origin and its power. It is from the entire surrender of His will in Gethsemane that the Hight Priest on the throne has the power to ask what He will, has the right to make His people share in that power too, and ask what they will.<\/p>\n 2. What Thou wilt.Out of that agonyborne through the power of intense prayer of supplicationcame forth submission to the will of the Father. Not the acceptance of an inevitable fate, against which it is vain, and therefore foolish to strivesuch as a mere Fatalist or Cynic might show. But the submission, first, of a perfect faithsure that whatever our Father ordains must be wellsure that He will not suffer one tear or pang that is not needed for Salvationsure that whatever He lays on us, He will give us comfort and strength to bear. Not my will, but Thine be doneThine the all-wiseThine the all-mercifulThine the almighty will. But, even beyond this, there is the submission of love. There is an actual delight in sacrifice of self for those we love, which, in the world as it is, makes men count inevitable suffering as joy, and, out of that suffering for others, actually begets a fresh access of love to them, which is itself an exaltation and a comfort.<\/p>\n Christs prayer was not for the passing of the cup, but that the will of God might be done in and by Him, and He was heard in that he feared, not by being exempted from the Cross, but by being strengthened through submission for submission. So His agony is the pattern of all true prayer, which must ever deal with our wishes, as He did with His instinctive shrinking,present them wrapped in an if it be possible, and followed by a nevertheless. The meaning of prayer is not to force our wills on Gods, but to bend our wills to His; and that prayer is really answered of which the issue is our calm readiness for all that He lays upon us.1 [Note: A. Maclaren.] <\/p>\n 3. It is best so. The cup did not pass from Him because it was not possible; but yet in two ways, far above our ways, His prayer was granted. It was granted first of all(the whole history of the Passion proves it)it was granted in the heavenly strength that was given to Him to bear all the pains and sorrows that were laid upon Him. As afterwards He said to His great Apostle, My grace is sufficient for thee, so, now, Gods grace was sufficient for Him. There appeared, we are told, an angel from heaven strengthening Him; and in the power of that strength He rose from His knees, no longer sorrowful, no longer bowed down with terror and trouble, but calm and cheerful, ready to go forth and meet His enemies, ready to bear all the taunts and pains of His trial and crucifixion, ready to answer a good confession before Pontius Pilate, and to pray for His brothers, and to think of His mother and friend, and of His companions in woe, and to look back on the finishing of His mighty work, and to commend His soul to His Fathermore majestic, more adorable, more Divine than He had ever seemed before.<\/p>\n Let us fix our thoughts on that second and yet grander mode in which our Lords petition was answered, even according to those sacred words of His own, which are the model of all prayer, which are the key and secret of this Divine tragedyNevertheless, not my will but thine be done. That is the sum and substance of the whole narrative of the Passion. Not the substitution of the will of Christ for the will of the eternal God, but the substitution of the will of the eternal God for the will even of His most dearly beloved Son.<\/p>\n There is a friend of mine, a dear and brilliant friend, whose name would be honoured by you all if I were free to mention it. He told me the other day the darkest chapter of his life. He told me how his whole life lay suddenly broken off in disaster: his work ended, his heart broken, himself in hospital suffering cruel pain. And then he said: Oh, Dawson, what visions of God I had as I lay in hospital! what a sense of eternity, and the reality of things spiritual! I tell you, if I knew to-day I could gain such visions of God and truth only by repeating my sufferings, I would crawl upon my hands and knees across this continent to get that disease! Ah! there lies the justification of our Gethsemanes. We need the utter loneliness, we need the separation from friend and lover, to make us sure of God. And Jacob was left alone, says the older record: and there wrestled a man with him till the breaking of the day. Even sotill the breaking of the day, for the divinest of all dawns shines in the Gethsemane of sacrifice.1 [Note: W. J. Dawson.] <\/p>\n 4. How blessed was the Result. He prayed His way to perfect calm, which is ever the companion of perfect self-surrender to God. They who cease from their own works do enter into rest. All the agitations which had come storming in massed battalions against Him are defeated by it. They have failed to shake His purpose, they now fail even to disturb His peace. So, victorious from the dreadful conflict, and at leisure of heart to care for others, He can go back to the disciples.<\/p>\n And so you find that from this moment Jesus moves to His end in majestic calm. The agony is passed, and it is passed for ever; He knows the darkness to be but the shadow of Gods wing. He speaks henceforth as one who sees the dawn, and has the light of dawn upon His brow.<\/p>\n And how great is the Encouragement. Christs agony is the very consecration of human suffering, the fresh spring of human hope. There is no depth into which we can be plunged that He has not fathomed, no gloom into which we can be cast that He has not illumined. There are trials harder to bear even than death itself, but Christ has known their bitterness, and if we recognise the source of sin from which they first flowed, He can turn those bitter waters into rivers of comfort.<\/p>\n We very properly distinguish in ourselves two wills, the one of natural inclination, the instinctive will, if you please; the other the deliberate purpose and choice of the moral and rational nature. Our first effort must be the complete surrender of our deliberate rational will to God, to work ever in submission to His gracious ordering for our lives. Then the constant discipline of the Christian life becomes the stern struggle to subdue the will of natural inclination and to bring it a captive to our Lord. This is the sacrifice we have to offer Him, a feeble counterpart in our small way, of the heroic self-sacrifice He offered that day in Gethsemane.1 [Note: A. Ritchie.] <\/p>\n I know, O Jesus, in the bitter hour<\/p>\n Of human pain, that Thou hast felt the power<\/p>\n Of deeper anguish, and my lips are still,<\/p>\n Because in silence Thou hast borne Gods will.2 [Note: E. H. Divall, The Ways of God, 22.] <\/p>\n Christ in Prayer<\/p>\n What is prayer? It is to connect every thought with the thought of God. To look on everything as His work and His appointment. To submit every thought, wish, and resolve to Him. To feel His presence, so that it shall restrain us even in our wildest joy. That is prayer. And what we are now, surely we are by prayer. If we have attained any measure of goodness, if we have resisted temptations, if we have any self-command, or if we live with aspirations and desires beyond the common, we shall not hesitate to ascribe all to prayer.<\/p>\n 1. Christ is an Example in prayer. There is many a case in life, where to act seems uselessmany a truth which at times appears incredible. Then we throw ourselves on HimHe did it, He believed it, that is enough. He was wise, where I am foolish. He was holy, where I am evil. He must know. He must be right. I rely on Him. Bring what arguments you may; say that prayer cannot change Gods will. I know it. Say that prayer ten thousand times comes back like a stone. Yes, but Christ prayed, therefore I may and I will pray. Not only so, but I must pray; the wish felt and not uttered before God, is a prayer. Speak, if your heart prompts, in articulate words, but there is an unsyllabled wish which is also prayer. You cannot help praying, if Gods spirit is in yours.<\/p>\n 2. Christs Prayer is an Example of what prayer is. A common popular conception of prayer is, that it is the means by which the wish of man determines the Will of God. This conception finds an exact parallel in those anecdotes with which Oriental history abounds, wherein a sovereign gives to his favourite some token, on the presentation of which every request must be granted. As when Ahasuerus promised Queen Esther that her petition should be granted, even to the half of his kingdom. As when Herod swore to Herodias daughter that he would do whatever she should require.<\/p>\n (1) Try this conception by four tests:<\/p>\n (a) Try it by its incompatibility with the fact that this universe is a system of laws. Things are thus, rather than thus. Such an event is invariably followed by such a consequence. This we call a law. All is one vast chain, from which if you strike a single link you break the whole. It has been truly said that to heave a pebble on the seashore one yard higher up would change all antecedents from the creation, and all consequents to the end of time. For it would have required a greater force in the wave that threw it thereand that would have required a different degree of strength in the stormthat again, a change of temperature all over the globeand that again, a corresponding difference in the temperaments and characters of the men inhabiting the different countries. So that when a child wishes a fine day for his morrows excursion, and hopes to have it by an alteration of what would have been without his wish, he desires nothing less than a whole new universe.<\/p>\n (b) Try it next by fact. Ask those of spiritual experience. We do not ask whether prayer has been efficaciousof course it has. It is Gods ordinance. Without prayer the soul dies. But what we ask is, whether the good derived has been exactly this, that prayer brought them the very thing they wished for? For instance, did the plague come and go according to the laws of prayer or the laws of health? Did it come because men neglected prayer, or because they disobeyed those rules which His wisdom has revealed as the conditions of salubrity? And when it departed was it because a nation lay prostrate in sackcloth and ashes, or because it arose and girded up its loins and removed those causes and those obstructions which, by everlasting Law, are causes and obstructions? Did the catarrh or the consumption go from him who prayed, sooner than from him who humbly bore it in silence? Try it by the case of ChristChrists prayer did not succeed. He prayed that the cup might pass from Him. It did not so pass.<\/p>\n (c) Try it by its assumptions. To think that prayer changes Gods will, gives unworthy ideas of God. It supposes our will to be better than His, the Unchangeable, the Unsearchable, the All-Wise. Can you see the All of thingsthe consequences and secret connections of the event you wish? And if not, would you really desire the terrible power of infallibly securing it?<\/p>\n (d) Try it by its results. If we think that answered prayer is a proof of grace, we shall be unreasonably depressed and unreasonably elateddepressed when we do not get what we wish, elated when we do; besides, we shall judge uncharitably of other men. Two farmers pray, the one whose farm is on light land, for rain; the other, whose contiguous farm is on heavy soil, for fine weather; plainly one or the other must come, and that which is good for one may be injurious to the other. If this be the right view of prayer, then the one who does not obtain his wish must mourn, doubting Gods favour, or believing that he did not pray in faith. Two Christian armies meet for battleChristian men on both sides pray for success to their own arms. Now if victory be given to prayer, independent of other considerations, we are driven to the pernicious principle that, success is the test of Right. From all which the history of this prayer of Christ delivers us. It is a precious lesson of the Cross, that apparent failure is Eternal victory. It is a precious lesson of this prayer, that the object of prayer is not the success of its petition; nor is its rejection a proof of failure. Christs petition was not gratified, yet He was the One well-beloved of His Father.<\/p>\n (2) The true efficacy of prayer is found in the words, As thou wilt. All prayer is to change the will human into submission to the will Divine. Trace the steps in this history by which the mind of the Son of Man arrived at this result. First, we find the human wish almost unmodified, that That cup might pass from Him. Then He goes to the disciples, and it would appear that the sight of those disciples, cold, unsympathetic, asleep, chilled His spirit, and set in motion that train of thought which suggested the idea that perhaps the passing of that cup was not His Fathers will. At all events He goes back with this perhaps, If this cup may not pass from me except I drink it, thy will be done. He goes back again, and the words become more strong: Nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt. The last time He comes, all hesitancy is gone. Not one trace of the human wish remains; strong in submission, He goes to meet His doomRise, let us be going; behold he is at hand that doth betray me. This, then, is the true course and history of prayer.1 [Note: F. W. Robertson.] <\/p>\n He prayed, but to his prayer no answer came,<\/p>\n And choked within him sank his ardours flame;<\/p>\n No more he prayed, no more the knee he bent,<\/p>\n While round him darkened doubt and discontent;<\/p>\n Till in his room, one eve, there shone a light,<\/p>\n And he beheld an angel-presence bright,<\/p>\n Who said: O faint heart, why hast thou resigned<\/p>\n Praying, and no more callest God to mind?<\/p>\n I prayed, he said, but no one heard my prayer,<\/p>\n Long disappointment has induced despair.<\/p>\n Fool! said the angel, every prayer of thine,<\/p>\n Of Gods immense compassion was a sign;<\/p>\n Each cry of thine O Lord! itself contains<\/p>\n The answer, Here am I; thy very pains,<\/p>\n Ardour, and love and longing, every tear<\/p>\n Are His attraction, prove Him very near.<\/p>\n The cloud dispersed; once more the suppliant prayed,<\/p>\n Nor ever failed to find the promised aid.2 [Note: Jalaluddin Rumi, in Claud Fields A Little Book of Eastern Wisdom, 49.] <\/p>\n The Prayer in Gethsemane<\/p>\n Literature<\/p>\n Barry (A.), First Words in Australia, 93.<\/p>\n Burrell (D. J.), Christ and Progress, 200.<\/p>\n Cameron (A. B.), From the Garden to the Cross, 43.<\/p>\n Dawson (W. J.), The Evangelistic Note, 171.<\/p>\n Hall (N.), Gethsemane, 58.<\/p>\n Hull (E. L.), Sermons preached at Kings Lynn, iii. 58.<\/p>\n Lewis (A.), Sermons preached in England, 61.<\/p>\n Maclaren (A.), Expositions of Holy Scripture, Matt, xviii.xxviii., 261.<\/p>\n Murray (A.), With Christ in the School of Prayer, 222.<\/p>\n Robertson (F. W.), Sermons, iv. 23.<\/p>\n Sowter (G. A.), Trial and Triumph, 175.<\/p>\n Spurgeon (C. H.), Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, xlvii. No. 2715.<\/p>\n Westcott (B. F.), Village Sermons, 120.<\/p>\n Christian World Pulpit, i. 344 (Stanley).<\/p>\n Expository Times, xx. 356.<\/p>\n Abba: Mat 6:9, Rom 8:15, Rom 8:16, Gal 4:6 <\/p>\n all: Mar 10:27, Gen 18:14, Jer 32:27, 2Ti 2:13, Tit 1:2, Heb 5:7, Heb 6:18 <\/p>\n take: Luk 22:41, Luk 22:42 <\/p>\n nevertheless: Psa 40:8, Joh 4:34, Joh 5:30, Joh 6:38, Joh 6:39, Joh 12:27, Joh 18:11, Phi 2:8, Heb 5:7, Heb 5:8 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Job 42:2 – thou Psa 18:6 – distress Mat 20:22 – the cup Mat 26:39 – and prayed Mar 10:38 – drink of the Mar 10:39 – Ye Mar 14:32 – while Joh 12:28 – Father Heb 12:2 – endured<\/p>\n HARMONY OF WILL<\/p>\n Nevertheless not what I will, but what Thou wilt<\/p>\n Mar 14:36<\/p>\n As a man, Christ clung closely to the Father. He did not lose the consciousness of His Sonship in these trying moments of dark agonising burden and sorrow. It was Father still, amid the heart-crushing grief. Jesus and the Father had not two wills between them in relation to a single element of this dark experience. The Divine and the human were at one. The union was completethe acquiescence perfect.<\/p>\n I. The self-emptying.But the harmony of the willsthe perfect union of the Divine and humanis not all. Christ freely said, Not what I will, but what Thou wilt, to His Father. This expresses a perfect act of self-emptying. The sorrow was met with a willing minda resigned heart. It was His life-long attitude. This was only the climax of the moral triumph. This was only obedience unto death. He bare the sins of the transgressors. He offered Himself without spot unto God; and thus, through atoning sacrifice, He condemns sin, secures pardon, and opens the Kingdom of Heaven to all believers.<\/p>\n II. Gethsemane has its lessons and influences for all our hearts.<\/p>\n (a) How it condemns sin! Who can think of this unutterable woe and suppose that human sin is a matter of indifference to God? Who can think of Gethsemane, and not feel rising within an unutterable revulsion from it?<\/p>\n (b) How it reveals the chiefest human virtue and the power by which it may be attained! Identity of will with the will of God is the foundation, and the sum, and the crown of human excellence in this and in all worlds. Thy will be done involves in our casewhat it did in Christsready obedience and perfect, unmurmuring submission.<\/p>\n (c) How Gethsemane brings the Father close to our hearts in their sorrow and extremity!<\/p>\n 6. This prayer had to do with the hour just commented upon.<\/p>\n And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. <\/p>\n [Abba, Father.] As it is necessary to distinguish between the Hebrew and Chaldee idiom in the words Abi; and Abba; so you may; I had almost said, you must; distinguish of their sense. For the word Abi; signifies indeed a natural father, but withal a civil father also, an elder, a master, a doctor, a magistrate: but the word Abba; denotes only a natural father, with which we comprehend also an adopting father: yea, it denotes, My father.<\/p>\n Let no man say to his neighbour, ‘My father’ is nobler than thy father. “R. Chaija asked Rabh the son of his brother, when he came into the land of Israel, Doth my father live? And he answereth, And doth your mother live? ” As if he should have said, You know your mother is dead, so you may know your father is dead. “Solomon said, Observe ye what my father saith?” So in the Targum infinite times.<\/p>\n And we may observe in the Holy Scriptures, wheresoever mention is made of a natural father, the Targumists use the word Abba; but when of a civil father, they use another word: — <\/p>\n I. Of a natural father.<\/p>\n Gen 22:7; “And he said, ‘Abi,’ my father.” The Targum reads, “And said, ‘Abba,’ my father.” Gen 27:34; “Bless me, even me also ‘Abi,’ O my father.” The Targum reads, Bless me also, ‘Abba,’ my father. Gen 48:18; Not so, ‘Abi,’ my father. Targum, Not so, ‘Abba,’ my father. Jdg 11:36; ‘Abi,’ my father, if thou hast opened thy mouth. Targum, ‘Abba,’ my father, if thou hast opened thy mouth. Isa 8:4; The Targum reads, before the child shall know to cry ‘Abba,’ my father, and my mother. See also the Targum upon Jos 2:13; and Jdg 14:16; and elsewhere very frequently.<\/p>\n II. Of a civil father.<\/p>\n Gen 4:20;21: He was ‘Abi,’ the father of such as dwell in tents. “He was ‘Abi,’ the father of such as handle the harp,” etc. The Targum reads, He was ‘Rabba,’ the prince or the master of them. 1Sa 10:12; But who is ‘Abihem,’ their father? Targum, Who is their ‘Rab,’ master or prince? 2Ki 2:12; ‘Abi, Abi,’ my father, my father. The Targum, Rabbi, Rabbi. 2Ki 5:13; And they said, ‘Abi,’ my father. The Targum, And they said, ‘Mari,’ my Lord. 2Ki 6:21; ‘Abi,’ my father, shall I smite them? Targum, ‘Rabbi,’ shall I kill; etc.<\/p>\n Hence appears the reason of those words of the apostle, Rom 8:15; Ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. And Gal 4:6; “Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father.” It was one thing to call God Abi, Father; that is, Lord, King, Teacher, Governor; etc.; and another to call him Abba, My Father. The doctrine of adoption, in the proper sense, was altogether unknown to the Jewish schools (though they boasted that the people of Israel alone were adopted by God above all other nations); and yet they called God Father; and our Father; that is, our God, Lord, and King, etc. But “since ye are sons (saith the apostle), ye cry, Abba, O my Father;” in the proper and truly paternal sense.<\/p>\n Thus Christ in this place, however under an unspeakable agony, and compassed about on all sides with anguishments, and with a very cloudy and darksome providence; yet he acknowledges, invokes, and finds God his Father; in a most sweet sense.<\/p>\n We cry, ‘Abba,’ Father. Did the saints, invoking God, and calling him Abba; add also Father? Did Christ also use the same addition of the Greek word Father; and did he repeat the word Abba or Abi? Father seems rather here to be added by Mark, and there also by St. Paul, for explication of the word ‘Abba’: and this is so much the more probable also, because it is expressed Father; and not O Father; in the vocative.<\/p>\n Mar 14:36. Abba, Father. Mark gives, not only the substance of the prayer (Mar 14:35), but some of the words of our Lora. Abba is the word for Father in the dialect of that time and country. In explanation Mark adds the Greek word. But before this Gospel was written, Abba Father came into general use as an address to God (Rom 8:15; Gal 4:6), probably from our Lords use of the former word.<\/p>\n All things are possible unto thee. Peculiar to Mark, and doubtless a part of the very form used.<\/p>\n Howbeit, not what I will. The form differs from that of Matthew, and might be paraphrased: But, the great question is, not what I will, but what thou wilt.<\/p>\n 14:36 And he said, {h} Abba, Father, all things [are] possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt.<\/p>\n (h) This doubling of the word was used in those days when their languages were mixed together: for the word “Abba” is a Syrian word.<\/p>\n And he said, Abba, Father, all things [are] possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. 36. Abba ] St Mark alone has preserved for us this word. St Peter could not fail to have treasured up the words of murmured anguish, which, “ about … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:36”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24776","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24776","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24776"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24776\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24776"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24776"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24776"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Great Texts of the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"