Let this cup pass from me

[creekster]

This is something I have been pondering for some time and I am curious what others here think. Why did Jesus ask for the cup to pass from him if possible? Was it rhetorical or was it a moment of doubt or unwillingness? If the latter how can this be reconciled with the notion of a perfect life or a perfect sacrifice?

[DrumNFeather]

Originally Posted by creekster

This is something I have been pondering for some time and I am curious what others here think. Why did Jesus ask for the cup to pass from him if possible? Was it rhetorical or was it a moment of doubt or unwillingness? If the latter how can this be reconciled with the notion of a perfect life or a perfect sacrifice?

Perhaps it adds that human element that some need to get through tough times. It might be a cliche attitude, but I believe that many find comfort in knowing that even Jesus asked for his afflictions to be removed from him.

There is something human in his statement, and I think it provides a very real application for some people who find themselves questioning their faith, God's exsistance, or his love for them as they go through hard times. Maybe it doesn't make them feel so week or vunurable for feeling that way.

[Archaea]

I want to get my Orthodox Corruption of Scripture to determine if it's in the original or not.

It almost sounds like a scribal insertion.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I want to get my Orthodox Corruption of Scripture to determine if it's in the original or not.

It almost sounds like a scribal insertion.

I wondered the same thing. I was hoping some here could help me out in considering it by giving any background info or by sharing their thoughts, such as DnF did.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I want to get my Orthodox Corruption of Scripture to determine if it's in the original or not.

It almost sounds like a scribal insertion.

My sense is just the opposite, that much of the "human" Jesus has been stripped out of the Gospels.

How about this explanation: it is not a sin to have doubts if in the end we do what we are supposed to.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by creekster

This is something I have been pondering for some time and I am curious what others here think. Why did Jesus ask for the cup to pass from him if possible? Was it rhetorical or was it a moment of doubt or unwillingness? If the latter how can this be reconciled with the notion of a perfect life or a perfect sacrifice?

I have always thought that it is impossible to have humility if you have no actual desires of your own. Perhaps Christ had to have desires (suggesting desire isn't always a sin) in order to demonstrate humility.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by creekster

This is something I have been pondering for some time and I am curious what others here think. Why did Jesus ask for the cup to pass from him if possible? Was it rhetorical or was it a moment of doubt or unwillingness? If the latter how can this be reconciled with the notion of a perfect life or a perfect sacrifice?

I thought it was supposed to show the humanity of Christ.

Isn't it from the Garden of Gethsemane? I thought we discussed the authenticity of that passage a few weeks ago?

Add:
Here it is:
http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6389

[creekster]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

My sense is just the opposite, that much of the "human" Jesus has been stripped out of the Gospels.

How about this explanation: it is not a sin to have doubts if in the end we do what we are supposed to.

But aren't doubts the antithesis of faith? How could Christ have perfect faith if he doubted his mission, or even doubted his desire to complete it? Christ's sacrifice was perfect because he was perfect. If sin is the state of acting or being in a manner that is inconsistent with God's will, then isn't asking to be relieved of the burden of the atonement when you are on the precipice of performing that great event an act that is inconsistent with His will?

DO not misunderstand me, btw, I don't doubt Christ, I just have a hard time understanding this particular scripture, and always have.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I have always thought that it is impossible to have humility if you have no actual desires of your own. Perhaps Christ had to have desires (suggesting desire isn't always a sin) in order to demonstrate humility.

I understand you to say that humility requires that you subjugate your own selfish/proud desires and, thus, if you have none you are unable to be humble. This may be so, and I could understand this sort of exchange between Jesus and HF early in his life when he was learning line upon line and he suddenly grasps the enormity of his mission, the terrible toll of the task he is going to undertake, and he asks if it is possible to do it some other way. By the time of the Garden, however, Christ has been transfigured and has been ministered to by angels and has completed his earthly teaching ministry leaving only the last few hours of his life and the final acts of the atonement to be completed and at THIS point he has a doubt? At this point, his own desires, which he undoubtedly had as a human, were long subjected to divine control and direction. His will and God's will were one (see the intercessory prayer) and, it seems to me, that a retreat from from that position of a sinless sacrifice, even for a moment, would undermine the entire act of the atonement.

I have wondered if it is possible that the comment was perhaps instructive only. It was a teaching moment, IOW, for us. Here is THE example of subjecting your will to God's will. This could be, but if so, it seems rather inconsistent with the moment. An odd time to make the point.

I could be wrong here, and do appreciate your input on it.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I thought it was supposed to show the humanity of Christ.

Isn't it from the Garden of Gethsemane? I thought we discussed the authenticity of that passage a few weeks ago?

Add:
Here it is:
http://cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6389

It was from the Garden, but I understood the discussion in Ehrman's book to be limited to the passages about the blood from pores. I will check again and see if I am in error. Maybe I read the book too quickly. Thanks for the reminder.