Man shall be betrayed; (6) He should be delivered to the Gentiles, who (7)

would mock, scourge and crucify Him.  It will be seen that, as far as the

physical side is concerned, the Saviour's knowledge was complete.  Is it true

that the spiritual side presented itself for the first time in Gethsemane?

Did He not say in the selfsame twentieth chapter, 'The Son of man came not to

be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many'?

(verse 28).  Did He not speak in this same chapter of 'the cup that I shall

drink of'? (verse 22).  Or coming nearer to Gethsemane, did He not say,

'Take, eat, this is My body ... this is My blood of the new covenant, which

is shed for many for the remission of sins'? (Matt. 26:26 -28).  Is there not

full knowledge and acceptance here?  Returning, therefore, to Matthew

16:22,23, we hear Peter saying, 'Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be

unto thee'.  What is the Saviour's reply to Peter?  'Get thee behind Me,

Satan: thou art an offence unto Me: for thou savourest not the things that be

of God, but those that be of men'.  Yet, if the traditional interpretation of

the prayer of Gethsemane be accepted, then the Lord does, if only

temporarily, echo Peter's wish, and so He (dare we pen the words) the

spotless Son of God on the eve of His great offering 'savoured of the things

of men, and not of God'!  The mere statement of such a conclusion carries its

own refutation with it.  Let us seek afresh the teaching of the Word.

For what did the Saviour pray?  Let us bring together the facts as

given in the Scriptures.  Immediately after the solemn supper, where the cup

had been renamed as the New Covenant in His blood, the Lord retires to

Gethsemane.  Turning to Peter, James and John, the Lord said, 'My soul is

exceeding sorrowful, even unto death', and going a little farther from them,

the Lord fell on His face and prayed, saying, 'O My Father, if it be

possible, let this cup pass from Me: nevertheless not as I will, but as Thou

wilt'.  To this record of Matthew 26:38,39 is added that of Mark 14:35, 'He

... prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from Him'.  We have

learned already from Hebrews 5 that (1) whatever the prayer, 'He was heard',

(2) He was heard 'for His piety' or 'godly fear' (Heb. 5:7; 12:28); (3) the

prayer was addressed to Him that was able to save Him from death.  Now if

'the cup' was the suffering and death as the Sin Offering, then the Lord was

not heard; but Hebrews 5:7 declares that He was heard, and that piety, not

fear, prompted the request.

The Physician's Testimony.  The medical language of the Gospel of Luke

and the Acts of the Apostles fills a volume, and a few samples from Hobart's

work will be found in The Apostle of the Reconciliation (chap. 1, pp. 11 and

12), and it is the added observation of a physician that makes Luke's record

of Gethsemane illuminating.  Luke 22:43 tells us that 'there appeared an

angel unto Him from heaven, strengthening Him'.  Can any child of God believe

that the weakness here implied was weakness of faith?  Was Abraham stronger

than his Lord? (Rom. 4:19).  Does it imply infirmity of purpose?  Was Paul

more resolute than his Lord? (Acts 20:24).  Does it imply a drawing back from

shame and death?  If so, what becomes of the exhortation of Hebrews 10:32 -

39, and were the worthies of faith, particularly those mentioned in Hebrews

11:35, of more spiritual nobility than 'the Author and Perfecter of faith'?

Perish the thought -- it is a second betrayal to entertain the suspicion.

The weakness was physical.  The Lord Himself said, in that very garden, 'the

spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak'.  His spirit never did draw

back.  The strengthening was for the body.  He was ever and always willing.

Was not the Lord 'crucified through weakness' (2 Cor. 13:4)?  The physical

condition of the Lord is further revealed by Luke's observation: