The Agony of Christ in the Garden

Mark’s Gospel and the Lord’s Supper

So if you have your Bibles, please turn them with me to Mark chapter 14 and go to verse 26 and then we have some visitors tonight, so by way of introduction this has been a section by section study of Mark's gospel it hasn't really been a deep dive exposition but more of a section by section overview as we've been studying this book for now several months and we're drawing close to the end, but we're still taking it one verse at a time as we look through it and Tonight we're going to be looking particularly at verses 26 to 42 which will take us through two sections of this of this epistle, I'm sorry of this gospel and will Cause us to see two events that are happening following the Institution of the Lord's Supper.

Last time we met was two weeks ago because last week we celebrated Holy Week. On Thursday night, we had our Monday Thursday service. But the week before that we went through the Lord's Supper and we talked about the differing views that people have about The bread and the cup and we said that there was the the Roman Catholic perspective Which is that the body and blood of Jesus are in the bread and the cup having been Transformed into his body and his blood that is called what?

Trans transubstantiation or a change of substance. Then we talked about other perspectives like the Lutheran view Which holds to a sacramental presence. They believe that Jesus is Present in the bread and the cup, but they do not believe in the same view as the Roman Catholic view so there is a distinction to be made there though it is a distinction that is Very difficult to discern at times because they both believe in Christ's physical presence.

I just it really is a an issue of what's happening in the bread and the cup. Roman Catholics believe that there is a representation of the sacrifice of Christ therefore creating a Propitiation in that work that there is a propitiation happening and that that in itself is is I think is a heresy But don't want to take us back into that.

And then we looked at the view of the traditional reform view which is the spiritual presence that Christ is spiritually present in the bread and the cup and Then we looked at the view that our church teaches which is the view sometimes referred to as the memorial view.

Which is that the bread and the cup are pointing to the the body and blood of Christ. But are not themselves the body and blood of Christ, but rather they are to act as a memorial of those of those realities.

Looking back to what Christ did on the cross looking forward to his return as he said Every time you do this you show forth the Lord's death until he comes again and the reason why I bring this up before we read is because One of the issues that happens when we talk about the bread and the cup is the issue of discerning what we would say is the divine nature of Christ and the human nature of Christ.

Because while we recognize that Jesus is the God-man. And we make that statement very Affirmatively that he is the God-man. We also have to affirm in that that there are certain lines that we do not want to cross and the early church went to great lengths to try to Outline for us and explain for us What we mean when we talk about Christ as being truly God and truly man the term in Latin is vera homo vera Deus.

Now homo in Greek means same or we get the word homosexual but homo in Latin means man or human and So in Latin vera means truth. It's where we the word veritas where we get the word truth vera homo means truly man and at the same time vera Deus truly God and we call this the hypostatic Union.

The word hypostatic is Greek or comes from the Greek and it is the word hypostasis, which means the essence or being of something or nature something so When we say hypostatic Union, we are saying the union of Natures.

Christ is not part God and part man. He is not 2030 or 6040. But everything that is God truly Christ is and everything that is man body soul and spirit truly Christ is and so if you read such as the Council of Chalcedon in their attempt to try to D Define this you will notice that there will be a reference to the Union of the natures of the divine and human that they are not mixed.

They are not confused and yet they are inseparable and undivided so unmixed and Distinguishable but not dividable or divisible. Now the reason why I mention all of this is because that's important for the table because it's how we come to you know.

Can Christ's body be here in a spirit? Not in Christ's spirit be here in his body. Now. There's questions that go with that. But in tonight's lesson, we're going to see Christ weep in his time in the garden and the question often arises How can?

Jesus as it were plead with the father and. And Say not thy will. Excuse me, not my will but thy will be done if Christ himself is truly God. How can he have another will. And so this question comes up and it is an important theological discussion.

But before we get there, we're going to see there's also this issue of Peter being told he's going to deny Jesus. So let's read the text. We're going to spend less time in the first part, but we will still read it and talk about it.

Verse 26 says and when they had sung a hymn They went out to the Mount of Olives. And Jesus said to them you will all fall away. For it is written. I will strike the serpent. The sheep will be scattered.

But after I'm raised up. I will go before you to Galilee. Peter said to him even though they all fall away. I will not. And Jesus said to him truly I say to you this very night Before the rooster crows twice you will deny me three times.

But he said emphatically if I must die with you, I will not deny you. And they all said the same. And they went to a place called Gethsemane. And he said to his disciples sit here while I pray. And he took with him Peter James and John Began to be greatly distressed and troubled and he said to them.

My soul is very soulful even to death. Remain here and watch. After going a little further he went on to the ground and prayed that if it were possible The hour might pass from him and he said Abba Father all things are possible for you.

Remove this cup from me. Yet not I will. Yet not what I will but what you will. And he came and found them sleeping and he said to Peter Simon. Are you sleeping? Could you not watch one hour? Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation.

The Spirit indeed is willing. But the flesh is weak. And again, he went away and prayed saying the same words again. He came them and found them sleeping. For their eyes were very heavy. And they did not know what to answer him.

And he came the third time and said to them. Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? It is enough. The hour has come. The Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners rise. Let us be going see my betrayer is that hand.

Mark’s Brevity and the Gospel Writers’ Different Emphases

Father in heaven may you give me the words to say. The voice and strength to say it that your people might be edified and Lord drawn to your son in Christ's name Amen. So two scenes immediately following Mark's account of the Lord's table now John's gospel Actually carries on for several chapters so the upper room discourse Sometimes referred to as the upper room discourse.

You remember when Jesus said Let not your heart to be troubled. I go there prepare a place for you all that stuff. John 14 those past though. That's all in the upper room. So Jesus has given the upper room discourse.

He has prayed what we call the high priestly prayer. John 17 that very long and lengthy prayer. That Jesus prays for his disciples all of those things mark simply leaves out. For what reason we don't know other than the fact that Mark's gospel is known for its brevity and It's known for moving quickly from one scene to the next.

He is intending to take us to the cross with haste. He wants to get us to the message of Christ dying for sinners. And so he does everything. What's the most? Common word in his book. Immediately, so what you said?

Yeah immediately if you read the English Standard Version the word immediately comes up over and over and over immediately this immediately that immediately this and it just reminds us that Mark is a Not hastily written, but hastily told Story of the life of Christ.

It is the shortest of the four Gospels. It has in fact the least amount of Information yet at the same time. It does tell us some things that other ones don't. We're going to see that in just a moment.

85 of mark is contained in Matthew and Luke. So there's only like a Very small handful of verses that are unique to mark. So just little things like that we see. Mark's gospel is a Interesting and unique gospel among the four.

Jesus Foretells Peter’s Denial and the Rooster Crow

So the first verses we read tonight are about His denial. Or excuse me Jesus foretelling his denial. It says they sang a hymn they went to the Mount of Olives and Jesus tells them that they're all going to fall away.

And he quotes the Old Testament. I will strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered. But after I'm raised up, I'll go before you to Galilee. Peter said to him Something that I think is pretty Peter like Peter had a tendency to Open his mouth and put his foot in.

I've said many times of all the Apostles. I feel like I relate to Peter the most. Because I sometimes have a tendency to speak too quickly and The Bible says we should be what? Slow to speak. So I'm still learning that when none of us have arrived.

We should all be able to recognize our own proclivities for error and Sometimes I do speak too quickly and so did Peter. And what is Peter's words here? He said even though they all fall away. I won't which I think is I obviously, I can't see what those men's faces look like, but I can imagine he got a pretty stern look from the other eleven.

At that point ten Judas already left. But to look at him and say what are you talking about? You're you think you're better than us. He said if they all fall away, I won't so Jesus in that sense is forced to Tell Peter what he knows and this comes to an interesting Moment in Mark's gospel Jesus said to him truly I tell you this very night before the rooster crows Twice now.

Reason why I Stop there is because if you look at this same passage in Matthew's gospel and in Luke's gospel. It does not say twice. You don't have to turn there. But if you want to if you want I'd read it to you.

It says in Matthew 26 34 Jesus said to him truly. I tell you this very night before the rooster crows. You will deny me three times so the denial is consistent three times. No problem in Luke's gospel Luke 22 34 Jesus said I tell you Peter the rooster will not crow this day until you deny three times you know.

So the denial again, it's consistent among Matthew Mark and Luke but Matthew Mark and Luke are inconsistent on the crowing of the rooster. Mark says twice Matthew and Luke Simply says crows and there's no time or amount given.

Now This has been a Object of Accusation and you know me I like to address these when they come up. Because I do enjoy apologetics and the I do enjoy the Importance of Giving a defense for the hope that is within us and sometimes that includes Addressing places where the Bible has supposed contradictions and in this case It is if you ever look at any of the online accusations where it'll say 20 ,000 Contradictions or 20 contradictions or 50 ,000 whatever there's always these websites that are devoted to Trying to find contradictions in Scripture, I don't believe there are any.

I believe everything can be harmonized. I've said that before but it's important to recognize when these come up so that we can at least address them. What is the answer? I think the answer is in Mark's gospel there is more information in Matthew and Luke.

We have the same information, but not all of it. And so I don't think Matthew and Mark. I'm sorry I don't think Matthew and Luke are intending to limit the number of crows but rather they are not being as specific as Mark's gospel in regard to this situation and the reason why I believe that is true is Because each of the four Gospels was written under the authority of an apostle.

Matthew of course was an apostle. John was an apostle. Luke was not an apostle. In fact Luke was probably a Gentile so probably not even a Jew. But Luke was writing under the authority of who? Paul. Luke would have been Paul's associate and therefore Luke's would have had Paul's Apostolic authority and we noticed something last week or the last time we studied about Luke's retelling of the Lord's table and Matt or Paul's retelling in 1st Corinthians.

What do we notice? It's the they both read almost identical. When Jesus gives the institution of the table if you read 1st Corinthians 11 Which is the first time the institution of the table is written down 1st Corinthians come before any of the four Gospels.

So when you read that the language that is used there is almost exactly the language that's used in Luke which gives again The idea that Luke is probably being written With Paul's influence. But Who is the?

Apostle who is most likely the one who is over Mark Peter. We have early church fathers who wrote that Mark's gospel was written from Peter's memories. That so it could it could easily be said that Peter.

That Mark is Peter's gospel. Because Mark's gospel though penned by Mark is Coming from the memories of Peter. And so when we come to this fateful moment Where Peter is the one? Who is being told by Jesus?

The rooster will not crow twice before you Deny me three times. Who do you think would have remembered that? Better than anyone. It would have been Peter. And so that's why I think Mark is giving us more information because it's pertaining to the one who is in view and Matthew and Matthew and Luke are not contradicting anything.

They're simply not giving all of the information and we've done this how many dozens of times since we started studying Mark. We see this throughout. We see Telescoping that that simply means to take a story and make it shorter or compress it or conflating it.

We see that throughout the four Gospels. This is why so many contradictions are assumed because people think the Gospels were written like a modern-day Historiography is written and that's not the way they were written.

The writers of the Gospels all very clearly had theological Reasons for writing what they wrote. They were writing biography, but it wasn't really Biography in the sense of how we understand biography.

They were writing theologically Motivated biography if you don't believe that read John. What is John's motivation he tells you his motivation these things have I written that you may believe That Jesus is the Son of God.

It's a theologically motivated writing he doesn't make any bones about it and therefore John's Gospels all over the map when it comes to like Places and events because his is not intended to be strictly chronological.

It's not intended to be Told as a narrative in the same way that Luke's is much more chronological. Luke's is much more specific about times and places. All of the Gospels have a different theological motivation and Understanding that helps us to understand it better.

We start our hermeneutics class this Sunday. And one of the things we have to come to terms with in our hermeneutics class is when studying the Bible. We have to remember the Bible is written like any other book in the sense that it is nouns and verbs and adjectives and You know prepositions but at the same time it's not written like other books in that it is God's Word given to us in a specific way and it's intended to motivate us to believe so.

Anyhow kind of went a little longer on that than I intended but the two roaster rooster crowing twice thing should not throw us. But Peter says if I must die with you, I Will not deny you now next week.

We probably won't get there next week either but in the weeks to come verses 66 to 72 Prove Jesus's prophecy, correct if you go down to verse 66, it's Peter in the courtyard and The the woman comes and says, you know You you are also with the Nazarene and he immediately begins to deny Jesus what you?

Yeah, what you talking about? I never met the guy and even curses says he he pronounces a curse and says That he didn't know Jesus. That's an amazing reality that Peter would go from willing to cut off the ear of The Malchus to being unwilling to say that he even knew Jesus.

Gethsemane and the Cup of God’s Wrath

Jesus's prophecy comes true. Now that all being said let's look at this event in the garden. And they went to a place called Gethsemane. And he said his disciples sit here while I pray. And he took with him Peter James and John and began to be greatly distressed and troubled and he said to them My soul is very sorrowful.

Even to death remain here and watch. Going a little further. He fell on the ground and prayed if it were possible this hour might pass from him. And he said verse 36 very important Abba Father All things are possible for you Remove this cup from me.

Yet not what I will. But what you will almost exactly quoted in Matthew 26 39 and in Luke 22 42. They all reference the same word and that is the word cup. They all begin with the same phrase father. Mark's gospel gives a little bit more.

It says Abba Father, which is an endearing term of calling God Father and Jesus says If it is possible Remove this cup from me now the cup needs to be understood. Because the cup itself is Is being used in a way that we normally don't use the language.

When I talk about a cup In general, I'm talking about a cup out of which we drink and in that sense Jesus is using the word in that way but he's using it in a way to point to an Old Testament principle and the Old Testament principle was the cup of wrath the cup of wrath.

In the Old Testament throughout the Old Testament you will read several passages where it refers to God storing up his wrath as It were like in a cup and on the day of his judgment taking that which is in that cup his stored up wrath against sinners and pouring that wrath out upon them and.

So when Jesus says take this cup from me he is not referring to some kind of vessel that is literal but rather he is referring to the figurative cup of God's wrath which has been holding the wrath of sinners since the beginning and If you just have just a moment and you want to open your Bibles very quickly turn with me to Isaiah 53 looking at beginning at verse 5.

By the way, if you're unfamiliar Isaiah was written about 700 years before Christ and yet it points to Christ in several passages. Chapter 7 14 chapter 9 6 and specifically this passage points to Jesus and it says.

Surely he has borne our griefs carried our sorrows. Yet we a street esteemed him stricken smitten by God and afflicted. That phrase smitten by God. It's very important because that is one of several in this passage that tells us what is happening on the cross smitten by God and afflicted.

He was wounded for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities upon him the chastisement that brought us peace and with his stripes. We are healed. Don't want to get into that one right now.

That's been absconded with by many a false faith healer trying to say that through Jesus's cross. Every sickness is a mere faith belief away from being healed. It's not what it's referring to. It's referring to our sin being taken by Christ.

It's not a promise of divine healing for every sickness. But again, I said I wasn't gonna get into it, but I did. All we like sheep have gone astray. We have turned everyone to his own way and the Lord has laid upon him the iniquity of us all laid on him the iniquity of us.

So he has been smitten by God and laid upon him is our iniquity. He was oppressed. He was afflicted yet He opened not his mouth like a lamb led to the slaughter and like a sheep before it shears the silence.

So he opened not his mouth by oppression and judgment. He was taken away and as for the his generation who has considered that he was cut off from the land of the living stricken for the transgression of my people.

Again, I want to put that one under stricken for transgression of The people not his own not his own transgression. That's key. We have to understand for what reason did Jesus die not for his sins but for ours and Then it goes on to prophesy.

They made his grave with the wicked and rich man and his death. Although he had done no violence. There was no deceit in his mouth yet. It was the will this is the part I was trying to get yet. It was the will of the Lord to crush him.

Will of the Lord to crush him. That is the key. It was the will of the Lord to crush him. He has put him to grief. When his soul makes an offering guilt for guilt, he shall see his offspring. He shall prolong his days.

The will of the Lord shall prosper in his hand now for sake of time. We won't read the rest, but I'm trying to drive to a point and I told I was talking brother Andy. I think Chris you I think we're talking about this beforehand, too.

There is a very real push Today By many people to try to deny the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement. Penal substitutionary atonement means that when Christ was on the cross He was taking the penalty for our sin that he was the substitute for us.

And he was making an atonement between us and God bringing Reconciliation between the two and the way he did that was God poured out his wrath on Christ in our place. That's what we call penal substitutionary atonement and everybody in this church We would all say a hearty.

Amen, because you've been preached that for 20 years. I mean, that's that's what we preach as what we teach, but there are many people that are starting with great vehemence to deny that doctrine. I mean Eastern Orthodoxy completely denies it and many Christians today are starting to they say oh, it's just Calvinistic doctrine.

This is not Calvinism. This is straight Bible this should be affirmed by Calvinist non-Calvinist. Because this is what the Bible teaches that on the cross. I put this in fact, I put this on Twitter. I said on that cross when Jesus died the wrath of God was satisfied now the majority of people.

Yeah, great, you know hearts and amens. But I have received very several messages private messages emails things you should not believe in penal substitutionary atonement and I was like from my cold dead hand man.

It's like you're gonna have to drag me away from it because this is what I believe the Bible teaches and I believe it teaches It right here. I believe this cup of wrath was pre Prophesied rather by Isaiah that he would be smitten by God.

See the thing that we have to realize is everything that happened for on on Christ on the cross. Happened by the hand of God April or April Acts 4. How is that April 4 acts 4 clearly says that what Herod and Pontius Pilate did they did?

Because God had determined that it would be done. That God had determined from the beginning the cross that he is in fact. Was this was the plan. Smitten by God God laid upon him the iniquity of us all he was stricken for the transgression of the people not for his own and The will of the Lord was to crush him.

Having thought about all of this from Isaiah 53 and knowing that Christ in fact is The Word of God made flesh that he certainly knows Isaiah 53 better than any of us. He knows what he means When he talks about that cup and when he talks about that cup, he's talking about that.

He's talking about what God is fixing to do to him. What the father is? Going to do to the Son on the cross. Not the Romans not the Jews. Not the enemies of God, but God Himself is Going to punish his son in the place of us.

This is why Paul would later say God did this so he could be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Christ. Why those two phrases and in Romans 3 26 just and justifier. God can be just righteous.

Because he doesn't not punish sin. He punishes it. Therefore he's righteous, but he's the justifier of those who have faith in Christ because he punishes the sin in Christ. In just a few weeks, I'm going to be in 2nd Corinthians 521.

I'm gonna spend a whole Sunday. You don't hear this again, by the way. Because on whatever Sunday I get to it 2nd Corinthians 521 says what anybody remember it? God made him who knew no sin to become sin for us.

That we could become the righteousness of God in him now if all of that is true and Jesus Knows that it's true. Knows that it's prophesied from the foundation of the world. Here comes the hard theological question.

Why would he ever ask? For it to be Not done. Is that not what he asked now? There's a ton of Ink that has been spilled in commentaries on to answer that question. And there is I think Difficulty in the question.

Because no matter what answer we give We're going to find ourselves in somewhat of a difficult place. R .C. Sproul and his lesson on this passage talked about st. Thomas Aquinas who was a great Theologian in the Roman Catholic Church.

I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but it's true. He was a great theologian, but yes, he was Roman Catholic theologian. But Thomas Aquinas in Regarding when Jesus said he didn't know the day or the hour Thomas Aquinas said well that he really did know but he didn't want to confuse the Apostles.

So he told him he didn't know. What does that make Jesus if that's true? It makes him a liar. That's a problem. I don't know where I don't care where you come from where you go. Jesus said something ain't true.

Even if it's a small little white lie, it's still a lie. So we I don't think we can go there with Thomas on that. But in regard to this question the question of Jesus saying If there be another way, how can we come to a conclusion?

I will tell you as I said, some people would say That Jesus was only asking this. Because he knew That his words would ring down through the ages and It would be for us an opportunity to know that there was no other way That Christ was simply doing this for our benefit.

Well, I think that's true. I don't think that's the only reason but I do agree that this is for our benefit. It is for our benefit that Jesus said if there's another way and then he got up and went to the cross.

Because he proved the answer was no. And I've told people before I say if you ever want to prove the exclusivity of the death of Christ for sinners for salvation. Because a lot of people run right to John 14 6.

I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father, but through me. I agree. That's a great passage. I preach it all the time. I love it. But if you want to have more evidence for the exclusivity of Christ, it's right here.

Because Jesus said if there be another way Take this cup from me and Even though the voice of God is not recorded We know the answer. The answer was there is no other way. How do we know because he went?

He didn't stand up and say whoo. Hey glad that's over. Yeah, God's established another way. No. The answer was there is no other way for God to be just and the Justifier of those who have faith in Christ.

This was the only way. So why did Christ ask for? There to be another way one Certainly could be for our benefit and that is true. But it could also be that when we consider the vera homo vera deus nature of Christ.

That oftentimes we get very consumed with the vera deus and we sometimes lose sight of the vera homo. Christ is truly man and in his humanity. There were times when he demonstrated frailty he slept. He wept he hungered and in this moment, even though it's not here if you were to go to Let me see.

Where is it? Luke's gospel it says that as he was praying Sweat. This is Luke 22 44 in agony prayed more earnestly and his sweat became like great drops of blood. Falling down to the ground. God doesn't sweat.

God doesn't bleed. But God the God man sweats and bleeds and so we are seeing this humanity pictured in this agony. You understand what I'm what I'm getting at now. I can't I don't want to go into Nestorianism.

Nestorianism so separates the humanity and the divinity of Christ that you can divide the two and we can't do that. But we can say that there are aspects of Christ's nature that touches humanity such as his hunger and his thirst and his Sleepiness and all those things they touch his humanity and as he weeps and as he cries and as I do believe literal blood.

There is a there's a condition I don't know the name of it. But doctors talk about it where the the capillaries begin to burst. Because of stress and our our skin can literally bleed from the capillaries bursting and coming through the skin.

This is a very legitimate thing that can happen and very likely was what was happening here as Christ is Praying and blood is dripping from his pores. Thank you, thank you. This is What we see Christ crying out.

He knows that in just a few short hours He is going to be Enduring the wrath of God. All of the wrath of God for every sin of Keith Foskey and all of you who believe but I just like to think of it. It just mine alone.

Deserves an infinity and an eternity of God's punishment and Christ took it in six hours on the cross. Christ took an infinite amount of punishment in a finite amount of time on behalf of every Believer and beloved.

I can't I can't help but think his thought was if there's another way. You see and so I do think we are seeing here a legitimate cry of agony in preparation for a legitimate time of distress. So that's my take.

Do I think it has other value? Yes, I think it values all of us, but I don't think we should step and take it only in the sense of one thing I think we can see it in its fullness that he is crying out to God.

Knowing what's coming? And I don't think he didn't know. I Think in this moment There is a cry of agony a legitimate cry so with that all being said The next portion and we'll Tie this up relatively quickly.

The next portion is simply the going back and forth with the Apostles Going to them. Are you asleep? Could you not watch one hour and we see this multiple times throughout until verse 42 and The next thing we're going to see when we come back next week is we're going to see Another use of the word immediately and mark verse 43 and Immediately while he was still speaking Judas came so Mark's going to get us quickly into the trials of Christ and Jesus before the council and Jesus on the cross.

But this this section here tonight. I hope Reminded us of some very important truths. If not anything else I hope it reminded us of the exclusivity of the sacrifice of Christ if we are trusting in anything else Other than the finished work of Christ on the cross.

We have placed in our faith in something that cannot save. But if we are trusting fully in the finished work of Christ on the cross. Then we can know that it is what God has prescribed for salvation and what Christ died to complete.

As he will say on the cross it is finished. Let us pray. Father I thank you for your word. I pray that tonight you would in your mercy. Remind us Lord that when Jesus said if there be another way the answer was no.

Because he is the only way the truth in the life. May we follow him? May we tell others of him and may we be reminded daily of our need for him in Christ's name. Amen.