Some scholars think Matthew's Lord's prayer is an amplified version of the shorter version that is found in Luke. The shorter version, they believe, may be what the Lord actually said.
The best manuscripts of Luke give the model prayer in what to us looks like abbreviated form. The matter in square braces is what appears in Matthew but not in the early Luke manuscripts. The matter in curly braces is my commentary.
My take is not that two different versions were known, but that Matthew's author added explanatory matter to make clear the intended meaning. He did not feel obliged to give a verbatim report on what he found in his source materials. He was giving what he considered to be a fair representation of what Jesus told his disciples. Matthew's writer wanted to make sure his account related to first century Jews. But he, or a scribal editor prior to the third century, also thought it important to put Jesus' spare words into context. This is very similar to the way in which a modern newspaper reporter paraphrases someone's words in order to make the meaning clear to the reader. We must remember that there was no convention of placing verbatim words within quotation marks.
Our Father
The compiler of the Matthew's Sermon on the Mount doubtless wanted to make crystal clear to newcomers that Father = God, and not some mortal human. And we have the probability that the prayer was amplified for purposes of group recitation. Whose Father? Our Father. This is a WE church.
Now though it is evident that Jesus was looking forward to the day, not far off, when his disciples would be born again in spirit and in truth and become true sons of God, we should not think un-Jewish those who regarded God as a Father. Consider that Old Testament Scripture calls him a Father to the fatherless.
Indeed the Sermon's compiler may have been thinking of a verse from Psalm 68.
heaven
I conjecture that Jesus did not usually qualify "Father" with the modifier "heavenly" or "in heaven." That modifier looks like something the writer or an editor decided on in order to distinguish between God as father and one's earthly father. But, in any case, as John's principal writer would have been quick to note, only those who have been born again (or, possibly, who are destined to be born again) can rightly call God our Father. And once he becomes our Father, that is it! He is the Father. One's earthly father may deserve respect, but he is father of the old, unregenerate man. The new man has only one father, God.
Though many of us were fashioned in the image of God, we soon, as a result of growing up in this world, died to God. By Christ's sacrifice, the original image of God in us -- hopefully -- has been and is being restored. This is an important point. God chose us in advance for salvation, for restoration. In a sense, we were always sons of God. But that relationship (which tends to elude our memories) was destroyed by sin. Now that relationship is restored, better than ever. By this reasoning, we can draw a parallel with the idea that Jesus was always the son of God, but events in his human life correspond to a renewal of that sonship.
Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven
Matthew has added this thought, I suggest, in order to make plain that the unfolding of the divine kingdom implies that God's will is to be done in the here and now. Again, we can see this in the context of the born-again believers. God's kingdom has come into their hearts and minds through trust in Jesus and the gift of the Holy Spirit. So these folks are much more inclined to do God's will, although most still have battles to fight against the flesh. When the kingdom arrives in its full splendor, those battles against the flesh will presumably be at an end and only the will of God will be done.
But deliver us from the evil one [CML.1]
I suggest these words were included in order to bolster the faith and understanding of new believers. These words are certainly implied by the previous words: "Lead us not into temptation." The Sermon's compiler wished to assure the readers that Jesus really saves.
The best manuscripts of Luke give the model prayer in what to us looks like abbreviated form. The matter in square braces is what appears in Matthew but not in the early Luke manuscripts. The matter in curly braces is my commentary.
Luke 11:2-4
The "doxology" with which many of us are familiar does not appear in the best old manuscripts -- neither for Matthew nor for Luke.2 He said to them, "When you pray, say:
[Our] Father [ in heaven ], hallowed be your name, your kingdom come. [Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. ]
3 Give us each day our daily bread.
4 Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us {literally, in Greek, "is indebted to us"}. And lead us not into temptation [but deliver us from the evil one ]."
Matthew 6:13 (doxology)
Various ideas have been offered to explain why what seems to be the original
Luke version (which is not found in the King James version of Matthew nor in other English translations) is a
slimmed down version of what appears in Matthew. Of course, nearly everyone
knows that the last verse in Matthew's version of the prayer is very likely a pious addition,
perhaps a bit of a hymn.
[For yours is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.]
My take is not that two different versions were known, but that Matthew's author added explanatory matter to make clear the intended meaning. He did not feel obliged to give a verbatim report on what he found in his source materials. He was giving what he considered to be a fair representation of what Jesus told his disciples. Matthew's writer wanted to make sure his account related to first century Jews. But he, or a scribal editor prior to the third century, also thought it important to put Jesus' spare words into context. This is very similar to the way in which a modern newspaper reporter paraphrases someone's words in order to make the meaning clear to the reader. We must remember that there was no convention of placing verbatim words within quotation marks.
Our Father
The compiler of the Matthew's Sermon on the Mount doubtless wanted to make crystal clear to newcomers that Father = God, and not some mortal human. And we have the probability that the prayer was amplified for purposes of group recitation. Whose Father? Our Father. This is a WE church.
Now though it is evident that Jesus was looking forward to the day, not far off, when his disciples would be born again in spirit and in truth and become true sons of God, we should not think un-Jewish those who regarded God as a Father. Consider that Old Testament Scripture calls him a Father to the fatherless.
Indeed the Sermon's compiler may have been thinking of a verse from Psalm 68.
Palms 68:5-6
Father in 5 A father of the fatherless, and a judge of the widows, is God in his holy habitation.
6 God setteth the solitary in families: he bringeth out those which are bound with chains: but the rebellious dwell in a dry land.
I conjecture that Jesus did not usually qualify "Father" with the modifier "heavenly" or "in heaven." That modifier looks like something the writer or an editor decided on in order to distinguish between God as father and one's earthly father. But, in any case, as John's principal writer would have been quick to note, only those who have been born again (or, possibly, who are destined to be born again) can rightly call God our Father. And once he becomes our Father, that is it! He is the Father. One's earthly father may deserve respect, but he is father of the old, unregenerate man. The new man has only one father, God.
Though many of us were fashioned in the image of God, we soon, as a result of growing up in this world, died to God. By Christ's sacrifice, the original image of God in us -- hopefully -- has been and is being restored. This is an important point. God chose us in advance for salvation, for restoration. In a sense, we were always sons of God. But that relationship (which tends to elude our memories) was destroyed by sin. Now that relationship is restored, better than ever. By this reasoning, we can draw a parallel with the idea that Jesus was always the son of God, but events in his human life correspond to a renewal of that sonship.
Matthew has added this thought, I suggest, in order to make plain that the unfolding of the divine kingdom implies that God's will is to be done in the here and now. Again, we can see this in the context of the born-again believers. God's kingdom has come into their hearts and minds through trust in Jesus and the gift of the Holy Spirit. So these folks are much more inclined to do God's will, although most still have battles to fight against the flesh. When the kingdom arrives in its full splendor, those battles against the flesh will presumably be at an end and only the will of God will be done.
I suggest these words were included in order to bolster the faith and understanding of new believers. These words are certainly implied by the previous words: "Lead us not into temptation." The Sermon's compiler wished to assure the readers that Jesus really saves.
No comments:
Post a Comment