03.09. The Lord's Prayer.
The Lord’s Prayer.
Some few persons are to be found who vigorously deny our right to attach the name "The Lord’s Prayer" to the model prayer which our Lord gave to his disciples. They call the prayer of John 17:1-26 "the Lord’s prayer" because he prayed it; and that of Matthew 6:1-34 "the disciples’ prayer" because they were to pray it. This is not mere hypercriticism; but it is invalid. The prayer of our study is the Lord’s in the sense that he is its author. Even the title seems to justify our selection of the theme for such a series as this.
Despite the frequent use of it, it is astonishing how many Christians have no knowledge of the different New Testament versions of the prayer. That in most common use does not follow exactly the rendering of Matthew or of Luke either in Common or Revised Versions. It is certain, also, that the Common Version contains matter lacking adequate manuscript authority. It is doubtless the case that large numbers of Christians would not regard the following as "the Lord’s prayer" at all:
"Father, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins: for we ourselves forgive every one that is indebted to us. And bring us not into temptation."
Yet that is the entire prayer as it appears in the Revised Version of Luke. In Matthew, there is a longer account, which yet comes short of the form in common use. The simple explanation of the different readings in Matthew and Luke is found in the fact that our Lord on two separate occasions gave a model and not a set form of words. The different accounts given in the Gospels furnish the clearest proof that the apostolic church did not regard the Lord Jesus as giving a liturgical form of prayer. As a model the prayer remains the most wonderful and comprehensive of petitions.
Some alternative readings.
Nearly everything in the model prayer is clear and simple, but two or three points arise which justify the inclusion of the prayer in our present series of studies. The qualifying clause "as in heaven so on earth" is generally used with reference to the third petition alone, and that seems the natural treatment. But some prefer to take the words in connection with the first three petitions, thus:
Hallowed be thy name, ) Thy kingdom come, ) Thy will be done, ) as in heaven, so on earth. |
Grammatically, this is possible, and of course it gives quite good sense. That reading would remove the difficulty felt in connection with the second petition. To pray "Thy kingdom come," it is frequently pointed out, was appropriate when the kingdom was yet proclaimed as future; but it is not so to-day, for Christians have been delivered from the power of darkness and translated into the kingdom of God’s dear Son. For the development or the progress of the kingdom, for its coming in fulness and glory, we can all fervently pray.
Much discussion, most of it profitless, has taken place regarding the words "deliver us from evil" (Matthew 6:13). The word for "evil" in the original may be either masculine or neuter. Taking it as masculine, our revisers have rendered it "the evil one." The matter cannot be finally decided, and it is unimportant. There can be no practical difference in our being said to be delivered from evil or from him who is the author of evil. Our "daily" bread.
There is one word in the Lord’s prayer which is puzzling. It is not only difficult, but it is quite impossible, in the present state of our knowledge, to give a final interpretation. That word is "daily"--one which the ordinary reader is apt to think of as one of the simplest words in the prayer. The Greek original is "epiousion," and it is found only in Matthew 6:11 and Luke 11:3, and nowhere else in literature. Scholars are still divided as to its derivation and meaning.
It should he quite clear to even the casual reader that the "daily" of Luke 11:3 cannot mean merely "every day," for that would be superfluous and tautological, seeing that Christ said "Give us day by day our ’daily’ bread."
Roman Catholic and some Protestant interpreters have accepted the meaning of supersubstantial bread, i. e., bread over and above material substance. Put in its best form, this interpretation simply says that Christ "meant his disciples, in this pattern prayer, to seek for the nourishment of the higher and not the lower life." Those taking this view point out that this is in harmony with the rest of the prayer: "The whole raises us to the region of thought in which we leave all that concerns our earthly life in the hands of our Father, without asking him even for the supply of its simplest wants, seeking only that he would sustain and perfect the higher life of our spirit." That we should put spiritual nourishment above physical bread, and that we may pray for spiritual food, is undoubted; but we do not think this is the probable meaning of the passage. It seems to us better to take the common view that one petition of the Lord’s Prayer deals with earthly needs. The prayer is a comprehensive one, dealing with both spiritual and physical requirements. A lesson in proportional values is taught in that the first part of the prayer deals with God-his holy name, his kingdom and his will; then we make request for ourselves also, and only one petition of the six relates to physical wants. It must be legitimate to entreat sustenance for even earthly life: and the very making of the petition shows that we recognise our absolute dependence upon God. After all, as Farrar remarks, "though we are spirits we have bodies," and in this prayer our Lord "recognises our human needs and bids us ask the All-Father that of his bounty they may be supplied."
There have been a few who have strangely thought this petition more suitable for men such as the apostles than for disciples to-day who may have well filled store-rooms and banking accounts. This objection seems a foolish one. We are all day by day dependent upon God. But for his constant care and providence where would our boasted provision be?
Very many scholars believe that daily bread means "bread for the coming day," and this follows the analogy of a similar Greek word and also gives excellent sense of itself. The prayer may be made at the beginning of a day, and in that case "bread for the coming day" will be "to-day’s bread," and that would fit Matthew 6:11, "Give us this day our ’daily’ bread." But "the coming day" might mean "tomorrow," and some definitely so regard it. For instance, Dr. Moffatt in his New Translation renders Matthew 6:11 by "Give us to-day our bread for the morrow," and Luke 11:3, "Give us our bread for the morrow day by day." That is, we seek supplies for one day ahead. While this view is not impossible, and while it may not be excluded by Matthew 6:34 ("Be not anxious for tomorrow"), yet "the daily asking for to-morrow’s bread does not seem quite natural." The English and American Revised Versions have the marginal reading, "our bread for the coming day," while the American has the additional alternative of "our needful bread." Rotherham puts "our needful bread" in the text definitely as his translation. For ourselves, while admitting that the matter must be left open, we incline to either of the meanings "bread for the coming day" (not necessarily "tomorrow"), and "bread for the day" in the sense of the needful or sufficient food. The latter view has much to commend it. The request then is for food required for health and strength. The prayer of Agur in Proverbs 30:8 has often been cited in illustration, "Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with the food that is needful for me." Plummer’s comment is worthy of notice. "We are not to ask for superfluities," he says. The petition will cover what is needed for culture and refinement, but it will not cover luxury or extravagance. What we need must not be interpreted to mean all that we desire; sufficiency and contentment will never be reached by that method. Contentment is reached by moderating wants, not by multiplying possessions."
There is a difference between Matthew and Luke which may be noted in closing. In the model prayer of the Sermon on the Mount the word for "give" is "dos" ("give in one act"); in the prayer given on the occasion recorded by Luke our Lord’s word was "didou" ("be giving" or "give us continuously"). Farrar quotes Dr. Vaughan’s comment on the different tenses: "Matthew touches the readiness, Luke the steadiness; Matthew the promptitude, Luke the patience of God’s supply."