#STRask - Did Jesus Ever Experience Fear?

Episode Date: December 12, 2024

Questions about whether Jesus ever experienced fear, why Jesus would pray three times for something he already knew he would be denied, and a song that seems to state that Jesus paid the price for all in the garden of Gethsemane rather than on the cross.   Jesus came to earth and experienced the same things we go through—hunger, thirst, weariness, anger, sorrow, etc.—but did he ever experience fear? Why did Jesus pray three times, “Let this cup pass from me,” when he already knew he would die? I recently heard the song “Gethsemane,” which seems to state that Jesus paid the price for all in Gethsemane and doesn’t mention the cross. This feels off, but how can I explain why it matters?

This is Amy Hall. I'm here with Greg Kokel, and you are listening to Stand to Reason's hashtag STRS podcast. And our podcast depends on your sending in questions. So if you have a question, please go to X. You can just write out your question, and it'll be the right length. That's the length we're going for, just about two sentences. And use the hashtag STRask. Or you can go to our website at str.org and look for our hashtag STRask podcast page. And right at the top of the page, you'll find a link where you can send us your question. So, Greg, we have questions about Jesus again today.

We've had a few of these recently, but— Imagine that. So, this first one comes from Chad. Christ came to earth and experienced the same things that we go through—hunger, thirst, weariness, anger, sorrow, temptation, and pain, to name a few. However, did Christ ever experience fear? My gut says no. What say you? Never had that question before. I'm trying to reflect. My gut says no, too, and that has to do with the nature of the God-man. So, he is one person, of the God-man. So, he is one person, two natures. That person, in my take, is the second person of the Trinity, which entails the divine nature and adds to it a human nature. So, the last session you cited from 1 John, that perfect love casts out all fear. You know, I'm just wondering, we have to be careful how we use this, because

now I'm thinking about 1 John. It says, fear entails judgment, and we're not under judgment, so there's no reason for us to fear, okay? But of course, that's just talking about one kind of fear. You know, if a rattlesnake was, you know, right in front of us and about to bite us, I think we would feel a natural fear of the human threat or the threat to our well-being. So these are other kinds of fears, and some people have characterized any kind of fear to be demonic. So certainly Jesus didn't experience the fear of judgment that John was talking about in 1 John. Could he have encountered a viper? You know, could he have—look, when the mobs were trying to push him over the brow of the cliff, you know, was there any anguish or fear, anxiety, if you will, regarding imminent, what appeared to be imminent execution or punishment or harm that would come

him? I don't—that would be natural. My gut, again, is that Jesus didn't experience it even then, because his trust in the Father was perfect. His knowledge that the Father's plans would be fulfilled, and that would be three years hence from this occasion in, what is it, Matthew or Luke 4, and the synagogue scene where everybody got mad at him and tried to kill him. Jesus demonstrated incredible equanimity, a peacefulness of mind in every circumstance, even though he was candid about his emotions, his anguish, and we see that in the garden in his prayer to the Father,

I don't think it's necessary to characterize that as the kind of fear that we experience. So my gut level certainly didn't fear judgment from the Father, though he experienced that on the cross. I think that the other occasions that fear show up naturally, a threat to bodily harm. I think he could have been startled by something, like a snake or whatever. Yeah, startle is different. That's caught by surprise. That doesn't necessarily entail a fear associated with it. So it's a good question. My sense is the God-man's not going to be afraid of anything. He's not going to feel fear in the sense that we think about it, even maybe even a certain sense,

a natural threat, because his equanimity based on his confidence in who he was and where he came from, where he's going, which, by the way, is a phraseology that's used in John 13, before he washes the disciples' feet. In other words, he was totally comfortable with understanding his role and who he was and his identity, that it wasn't an assault to his ego to wash the feet of the disciples. And I'm wondering if the same concept can be leveraged here in other aspects of Jesus' life. He knew who he was. He knew what he was there to do. And he knew he was always doing the things the Father wanted him to do, John 5. And so I don't see, I think it would be really unlikely.

This is a speculation, obviously, because we're just kind of thinking out loud here about the issue. I don't know, what are your thoughts on that, Amy? Well, we certainly don't see it ever. All these other things he says are described as things that happened to him, but we certainly don't ever see an example in the Gospels of him being afraid of something. I'm trying to think if there's any kind of fear that's not in any way related to morality or trust in God, but it's hard for me to think of one. There might be something I'm not thinking of, but certainly, if you were to trust that you're in God's hands fully, you believe it, absolutely, you have no doubts about that, we wouldn't really have any reason to fear, even knowing that bad things will happen to us.

Like kindergarten, anticipating that. Yeah. And I would say anticipation is not the same thing as fear. Obviously, if you're anticipating going through something painful, use the word anguish, I think that's appropriate, but I wouldn't call that fear. the word anguish, I think that's appropriate, but I wouldn't call that fear. Incidentally, all of the events that we have recorded that Jesus experienced from the betrayal on demonstrates that complete and total equanimity that I was referring to earlier. He was nonplussed. He was not frustrated. He had complete control. Don't you know that I can have you executed? You couldn't do anything unless it's been given to you from above. Are you a king? My kingdom is not of this world.

You know, it's just the kind of the responses under the pressure that in those cases, Pilate, but all the rest of them, you know, he just showed a tremendous presence of mind that doesn't evidence any of the kind of fear that I think is entailed in this question. And if he's not fearful in those situations, it's hard to imagine anything he would have been fearful in. What amazes me is we could live so much more in that state of mind if we truly believed and trusted that God is working all things together for good. But we have something Jesus did not have, or actually, Jesus had something we did not have, and I'm referring to the flesh. So having the flesh is a liability,

a weakness. It's not the strength. So that's going to play a part in, you know, I could be very confident that I'm going to heaven when I die. But if you put a gun to my head, my palms would probably sweat. You know, that kind of thing. That's just a reality of being a human in the world, even though we have a strong confidence. Now, I think there are people who went to their martyrdom even with complete equanimity. You look at somebody like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, for example. Those who were involved in the execution said they'd never seen anything like

this. You know, they've never seen anyone go into execution with that kind of, that is where equanimity, but that's what they were referring to. And in others, you read about the martyrdom of Polycarp, for example, and others that in the book of martyrs that just faced this gruesome end with tremendous aplomb. It's hard to imagine for us, but that's a grace, I think, given at the time it's needed. So let's go on to a question from Gary. In the garden, Jesus prayed, let this cup pass from me. It is clear that Jesus knew both in his humanity, Isaiah 53 and John 3, 14, and divinity that he would die and how he would die. Yet he prayed a prayer he already knew the answer to three times. Difficult to reconcile.

What might you suggest here? Well, it's not difficult for me to reconcile because I think if we have a robust understanding of his humanity, then we can understand the human anguish that he faced at that moment. Think of him on the cross. My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? Well, that's a citation from—he's repeating a verse that opens up Psalm 22, and the next line in that Psalm gives insight, because this looks like forlorn, and I don't know what's going on, and that's the way some people have characterized it. But the next verse says, far from my deliverance are the words of my groaning. Here I am. I need deliverance. I'm

not getting deliverance. And I take this as a cry from his humanity, not a question about what he said, you know, what is entailed there. That whole psalm is a psalm that sounds like a crucifixion from a first-person perspective, all the details that are in that psalm. And it ends on a note of hope. Yeah, he has performed it. Well, it sounds like it is finished, you know, a little bit like that. So, there's an expression that Jesus cries out on the cross in the midst of all of this that I think we have reason to believe is not an expression of doubt or confusion, but an expression of lament or anguish of a human soul enduring indescribable suffering. And I think that also helps us, I think, to understand what's going on in the garden. It's interesting how he continues that prayer. If possible, let this cup pass from

me, but not my will, but thine be done. In other words, that's an acknowledgment that it's not possible. He has understanding that his sacrifice is necessary to forgive sin. So, this is another argument in favor of the blood atonement. Jesus had to go to the cross. It wasn't just so he could die and be an example to others or show his victory over the cross. These are different characterizations of the atonement. But he had to do this because somehow in the bookkeeping of God, it was a necessary component that provided for forgiveness. And so I take from that, even in the garden, that he is fully aware of the necessity of this, yet he is in the midst of anguish as he anticipates it, because he knows the price he's going to have to pay. And he is saying a thing that,

you know, is understandable. You know, if it's possible, let this pass from me, but not my will, but yours be done. This is something I think, so many of the Psalms are expressions of lament. And I think this is something that maybe we need to do more of. Find a way to lament and be in anguish before God and express what we're feeling, even knowing maybe, like Jesus did, that it wouldn't be taken away and that He was submitting to His will even in this anguish. So what I would take from this is that the fact that you're lamenting doesn't mean you're not submitting to his will. And so I would hope if anyone feels like they can never express that lament to God, that they would feel free to express that.

Because if Jesus can do that, knowing that nothing was going to change, then there must be something valuable in that and expressing that to God. then there must be something valuable in that and expressing that to God. And one thing that this does, the people around him would have seen the intensity of what he was going through and his willingness to go through it at the same time. Because he wasn't demanding anything. He could have stopped anything at any time, and that was clear. He could have stopped anything at any time, and that was clear. But instead, he expresses how hard this is while at the same time submitting to God in this. All of these things together are certainly glorifying God in many ways.

We see what he's going through. That is made clear to the people around him. His submission and the cost of that is made clear to the people around him. His submission and the cost of that is made clear to the people around him. His love for the Father is made clear through this, that he is still putting that plan ahead of everything else. So I think this accomplished many things in the way that we understand God and what happened here. God and what happened here. And it also is a good model for us in that we can be open about our lamenting before God without crossing over into anger against God or accusing God, but rather submitting to what He has for us, knowing that all things are working together for good. A writer of Hebrews said that he endured the shame of the cross for the joy set before him. So that, both are conscious elements. According to that passage, he was aware of the shame of the cross,

and he was aware that joy would follow. So I think he had full comprehension at all stages of this. And what we see on the cross, where he cites the opening line of Psalm 22, and the prayers in the garden are best understood and properly understood, I think, as the cry of a human being facing a daunting challenge that he knows he must go through and he's willing to go through. But he is not unaffected emotionally by that, by the reality of that, ahead of him or while he's experiencing it. If we didn't have this record of, you know, maybe he just sat there in the garden and just prayed quietly with a beaming smile on his face, it would change the way we looked at the whole crucifixion. This reveals to us what actually was happening there, that this was real suffering. He wasn't just above it all in some ethereal state where it didn't touch him.

This actually touched him. It actually mattered. It made touched him. It actually mattered. It made a difference. It was real. And all of that is accomplished through his prayers and the people who heard him praying. That's right. Okay, here's a question from Christina. I recently heard the song Gethsemane. The song seems to state that Jesus paid the price for all in Gethsemane. The song feels off because it does not mention the cross. I don't know how to verbalize how slash why this matters, but feel very much like it does.

Well, your instincts are good ones because nothing was paid for in the garden. It was after the suffering of the cross, at the very end that Jesus said to Telestai, translated, it is finished. It was not finished before them. Now, you have an insight into this particular doctrinal statement. You might want to offer it now. So, as soon as I read this, I knew immediately what was going on, because this is the Latter-day Saint view of the Atonement, and they think that it was the suffering in the garden that paid for our sins

rather than the cross. And I'm not sure, I'm actually not sure why they have gone this direction, and this is from the very beginning. I think this is something, if not Joseph Smith, and it was certainly Brigham Young, So it's a very old belief of theirs. And this is why they don't have, part of why they don't have crosses on their buildings. But they think that everything was atoned for in the garden. They should have an olive tree. Oh, yeah. That would be nice.

So I figured pretty quickly this was a Mormon song. And so I looked it up. And yes, it is. But I don't really know how they get there. I'm not sure how they get there, except to say that if you are the devil and you're creating something to lead people astray, you'd certainly want to take everyone's eyes off the cross as much as you could. So maybe this was just one last thing thrown in there. Notice in Islam, the Jesus of Islam didn't die on a cross, so he didn't get resurrected.

They deny that. They think, I think it's Judas is the one who died on the cross, so he didn't get resurrected. They deny that. They think, I think it's Judas is the one who died on the cross. It wasn't Jesus. The historical records in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are mistaken. They have their own characterization written 600 years later, right? But the same thing is in play here. Let's deny the cross one way or another. The same thing is in play here. Let's deny the cross one way or another. And I know, I mean, for all I know, we have Mormon listeners. We possibly do.

So hopefully you can understand what I mean. Obviously, we think that the false religious ideas out there have some sort of origin that's not from God. Obviously, that's the case. So hopefully, you will take it in that spirit when I say it's demonic, because I do think that Mormonism is false, and it does lead people astray. Well, also, there is an angel of light, even by their own assessment, that is a principle in Mormon revelation, Moroni. And Paul, actually, in two different places, one in Galatians and also in 2 Corinthians, I think, makes a reference to deceptive angels of light, and that, I think maybe in the Corinthians passages, identifies this as a demonic influence. So, clearly, it's not a true angel. Remember Lucifer,

the original name of the devil, means shining one. And now he's called Satan. He's not called Lucifer anymore. Now he's called Beelzebul and, you know, all these other nasty names that are appropriate to his fallen state and his fallen nature. But it's not surprising then that the authors of Scripture would warn us against false teaching coming from a demonic source that will look like something good. They describe it angel of light. So our assessment now of LDS is not a kind of a rank condescension. It is an analysis based on biblical revelation. And by the way, if you are LDS, first, I want to thank you for listening to the show. Good for you.

That's significant. And weighing the things that you hear us say. But if you're LDS, you know the Mormon view of Scripture, of the Bible is, the Bible is the Word of God if it's properly translated, which Amy and I agree with entirely. We don't think a poorly translated Bible is the Word of God, at least in those points where it's poorly translated. So, therefore, our assessment here is from the text that Mormonism affirms is true. Okay, so what you need to do, instead of maybe taking umbrage at our conclusion that Mormonism is a demonic revelation from a so-called angel of light, is for you to look at the texts themselves and see if this is a reasonable conclusion based on the Bible you believe in, or you're supposed to believe in. Thank you so much, Greg. I really appreciate everything you said there. And thank you for

sending in your questions, Chad, Gary, and Christina. We appreciate hearing from you. This is Amy Hall and Greg Kokel for Stand to Reason.