The Lord's Prayer.

[michel]

I say this prayers most days, I taught it to my sons, explained it, and yet, there is something I have realised I don't undertstand in it.


Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation,

But deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power,
and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.
"And lead us not into temptation"
Why should God lead us into temptation, that we need to pray to him to ask him not to do so ?

 

[James the Persian]

I say this prayers most days, I taught it to my sons, explained it, and yet, there is something I have realised I don't undertstand in it.


Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation,

But deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power,
and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.
"And lead us not into temptation"
Why should God lead us into temptation, that we need to pray to him to ask him not to do so ?

That's not really what it means, Michel. It's more like don't allow us to be lead into, or keep us from, temptation.

As an aside, I understand that what you're using is the Protestant version, but the prayer really ends with 'But deliver us from the evil one', not just evil in a general sense and the ''For thine...' etc. is actually from the priest's response to the laiety saying the prayer which somehow got tacked on the end. Neither RCs nor Orthodox say that part.

James

 

[cardero]

Michel writes: Why should God lead us into temptation, that we need to pray to him to ask him not to do so ?

At the time God gave permission to Satan to put obstacles in our path (The story of Job and the temptation of Jesus comes to mind). I suppose this was a way the earlier followers of Jehovah would plead for leniency.

Michel writes: I say this prayers most days, I taught it to my sons, explained it, and yet, there is something I have realised I don't undertstand in it.

Michel. this is what I am to understand about the Lord’s Prayer:

“There is nothing right or wrong with it. In some religions, this prayer is the staple of their beliefs and that is fine. The first thing I should say about the Lord's Prayer or similar prayers is this: They are "model" prayers – prayers designed specifically to give humans a prepared device for communicating with GOD. ALL(WAYS) keep in mind that prayers are thoughts. There is no structured form to praying. There is no standard to praying. Even with prayers you have recited since you were young, ALL these prayers get heard. But do people actually realize what they are praying for and about? Do people really like to hear themselves proclaim the same prayer over and over again? These are questions best asked of each individual.

Well-spoken prayers are the ones that ask for guidance.”

HELLO IT’S ME: An Interview With GOD

Chapter: The Purpose Of Prayer

Pg: 381

 

[Ardent Listener]

An expanded translation by Dr. Rocco A Errico:

Our Father who is everywhere
Your name is sacred.
Your kingdom is come.
Your will is throughout the earth
even as it is throughout the universe
You forgive us our offenses
even as we forgive our offenders.
and you let us not enter into materialism.
But you separate us from error.
Because your kingdom, the power and the song and
From all ages, throughout all ages.
(Sealed) in faith, trust and truth.

FYI.

Ardent Listener

 

[michel]

That's not really what it means, Michel. It's more like don't allow us to be lead into, or keep us from, temptation.

As an aside, I understand that what you're using is the Protestant version, but the prayer really ends with 'But deliver us from the evil one', not just evil in a general sense and the ''For thine...' etc. is actually from the priest's response to the laiety saying the prayer which somehow got tacked on the end. Neither RCs nor Orthodox say that part.

James

Thank you for explaining that, and the 'extra bit' which has always confused me.

An expanded translation by Dr. Rocco A Errico:

Our Father who is everywhere
Your name is sacred.
Your kingdom is come.
Your will is throughout the earth
even as it is throughout the universe
You forgive us our offenses
even as we forgive our offenders.
and you let us not enter into materialism.
But you separate us from error.
Because your kingdom, the power and the song and
From all ages, throughout all ages.
(Sealed) in faith, trust and truth.

FYI.

Ardent Listener

That's interesting; thank you for that.

Thanks for your input too cardero.

 

[FFH]

This portion of the Lord's prayer is not correct.

Joseph Smith corrected this verse in his "Inspired Version" of the Bible.

Joseph Smith Translation Matthew 6: 13
"And suffer us not to be led into temptation, but deliver us from evil."
(This is the way the original text read)

King James Version Matthew 6: 13
"And lead us not into temptaion, but deliver us from evil."
(This is a translation of a faulty original text, which had been altered. It was not the person's fault who translated it into English, because the text had already been altered before King James commissioned it to be translated.)

 

[FFH]

Joseph Smith Translation Luke 11: 4
"And let us not be led into temptaion; but deliver us from evil:"
(correct inspired version)

King James Version Luke 11: 4
"And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil."
(this was translated from a faulty original text)

 

[Anastasios]

Well, I will just try to translate it myself, please forgive my presumption, I just thought it may be helpful. And excuse my English, since it is my not mother tongue.

Luke 11.4.1: ...ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν...
Matthew 6.12.1: ...ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν...
For the verb ἀφίημι (both), remit, check the Greek Lexicon:[url="http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2318332"]http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2318332[/url]
For the noun ἁμαρτία (Luke), sin, check the Greek Lexicon:http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?layout.reflang=greek;layout.reflookup=a%29martia;doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%234966
For the noun ὀφείλημα (Matthew), debt, check the Greek Lexicon:http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2376077
Luke 11.4.1: ...ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν...
Matthew 6.12.1: ...ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν...
Well if I would freely translate, it would simply be something like:

Luke: remit us our sins
Matthew: remit us our debts.

 

[jeffrey]

Michel, I take it to strengthen us. To give us strength against evil. The opposipte of leading us into temptation is leading us to God. IMO.

 

[Anastasios]

sorry my references are wrong. I missunderstood.

 

[Anastasios]

My apologies for my useless previous message. Now correct reference:
Matthew 6.13 and Luke 11.4 (exactly the same Greek sentence):

… μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν …

εἰσενέγκῃς: aorist, konjuctive (subj.), active, 2nd. sing. of the verb εἰσφέρω.

Because it is in active form, it cannot be translated as “to be lead”, but “to lead”

For the verb εἰσφέρω, carry in, bring in, contribute; bring in or upon; introduce; of persons, propose, nominate, check the Greek Lexicon: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2331538

it seems simply “do not lead us into temptation”

Regards.

 

[michel]

My apologies for my useless previous message. Now correct reference:
Matthew 6.13 and Luke 11.4 (exactly the same Greek sentence):

… μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν …

εἰσενέγκῃς: aorist, konjuctive (subj.), active, 2nd. sing. of the verb εἰσφέρω.

Because it is in active form, it cannot be translated as “to be lead”, but “to lead”

For the verb εἰσφέρω, carry in, bring in, contribute; bring in or upon; introduce; of persons, propose, nominate, check the Greek Lexicon: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2331538

it seems simply “do not lead us into temptation”

Regards.

Thank you very much Anastasios.

 

[mormonman]

This is what I don't get about the Lord's Prayer. In verse 7 of chapter 6 in Mathew the Lord says that we shouldn't use repetitious prayers. I always thought that the Lord's Prayer was an example for the apostles.

 

[Nehustan]

As an aside, I understand that what you're using is the Protestant version, but the prayer really ends with 'But deliver us from the evil one', not just evil in a general sense and the ''For thine...' etc. is actually from the priest's response to the laiety saying the prayer which somehow got tacked on the end. Neither RCs nor Orthodox say that part.

James

I covered the historic root of the addition to the six petitions of the prayer in another thread. Having been raised as an Anglican the 'addition' always intrigued me also. I will reproduce the part of the thread here...

There is of course the study of qabbalah by Christians. In fact at the end of the Lord's Prayer the members of the Anglican faith add what is known as the Qabbalistic cross, which is in no way meant to be confused with the cross at Golgotha, the resurrection, or the trinity. This moreover refers to the cross of tetragramatton (IHVH), and the sephirotic tree itself. It is thought that this addition was added to the Lord's prayer by returning clerics/knights/preceptors during the crusades at which time they were able, despite a remit to fight, to study with both Jew and Saracen. The addition in english reads

For thine is the kingdom, the power​

and the glory,​

for ever and ever. Amen.​

which comes from the Hebrew​

ATEH MALKUTH VE-GEBURAH ​

VE-GEDULAH ​

LE-OLAM ​

AMEN​

Although it is probable that the qabbalah came into Europe as a result of the crusades, it is also moot that it may have occured in Spain. It is oft cited that the qabbalah is an oral tradition, but it is considered that the Zohar was first written down by Moses de Leon around the late C13th during the Muslim rule of al-Andalus, between 711-1492 C.E.. Despite this some people believe it has been a knowledge held since the days of Adam, having been taught to Adam Qadmon by the angels to facilitate his return to the supernal Eden.​

 

[Popeyesays]

I say this prayers most days, I taught it to my sons, explained it, and yet, there is something I have realised I don't undertstand in it.


Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name.
Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread.
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation,

But deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom,
and the power,
and the glory,
for ever and ever.
Amen.
"And lead us not into temptation"
Why should God lead us into temptation, that we need to pray to him to ask him not to do so ?

Dear Michel,

My faith does not speak of "temptation" much, rather it refers to such things as "tests". Tests of courage, tests of faith, test of whatever - in a spiritual sense - the temptation lies in giving into the tests, as a path of least resistance. Resistance, however is good for us. So some tests will come, it is inevitable. God assures us that we will not be tested past our own ability to overcome the tests. God does not "test to destruction". Even in the Biblical allegory of Job, Job was NOT destroyed.

Prayer, fasting (the Baha`i Fast), obedience protect one against tests, Since we are only tested in what we are of need.

I myself, have attempted to convince God that I have dealt with the tests of limited financial means all my life, and it should be time for Him to test me with wealth. He apparently does not agree.

"To the sincere ones, tests are as a gift from God, the Exalted, for a heroic person hasteneth, with the utmost joy and gladness, to the tests of a violent battlefield, but the coward is afraid and trembles and utters moaning and lamentation. Likewise, an expert student prepareth and memorizeth his lessons and exercises with the utmost effort, and in the day of examination he appeareth with infinite joy before the master. Likewise, the pure gold shineth radiantly in the fire of test. Consequently, it is made clear that for holy souls, trials are as the gift of God, the Exalted; but for weak souls they are an unexpected calamity. This test is just as thou hast written: it removeth the rust of egotism from the mirror of the heart until the Sun of Truth may shine therein. For, no veil is greater than egotism and no matter 372 how thin that covering may be, yet it will finally veil man entirely and prevent him from receiving a portion from the eternal bounty."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 371)

Regards,
Scott

 

[FFH]

Matthew 6.13 and Luke 11.4 (exactly the same Greek sentence):

… μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν …

εἰσενέγκῃς: aorist, konjuctive (subj.), active, 2nd. sing. of the verb εἰσφέρω.

Because it is in active form, it cannot be translated as “to be lead”, but “to lead”

For the verb εἰσφέρω, carry in, bring in, contribute; bring in or upon; introduce; of persons, propose, nominate, check the Greek Lexicon: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3D%2331538

it seems simply “do not lead us into temptation”

Regards.

This is the way that it should read, because this original text has been altered from it's original form. This is why the King James Version also reads this way, because it was translated from this altered original text.

 

[Nehustan]

It's all Greek to me....

:bonk:​

 

[Anastasios]

This is the way that it should read, because this original text has been altered from it's original form. This is why the King James Version also reads this way, because it was translated from this altered original text.

what do you mean with "altered"? how do you know that is altered and when? do we have other text versions other than these ones. If you know it is useful to me, since I intend to collect this alterations at some point.

PS:That is right that there are freat deal of alterations in NT. But this doesn't seem a clever alteration, if it was intentionally done.

 

[michel]

I covered the historic root of the addition to the six petitions of the prayer in another thread. Having been raised as an Anglican the 'addition' always intrigued me also. I will reproduce the part of the thread here...

There is of course the study of qabbalah by Christians. In fact at the end of the Lord's Prayer the members of the Anglican faith add what is known as the Qabbalistic cross, which is in no way meant to be confused with the cross at Golgotha, the resurrection, or the trinity. This moreover refers to the cross of tetragramatton (IHVH), and the sephirotic tree itself. It is thought that this addition was added to the Lord's prayer by returning clerics/knights/preceptors during the crusades at which time they were able, despite a remit to fight, to study with both Jew and Saracen. The addition in english reads

For thine is the kingdom, the power​

and the glory,​

for ever and ever. Amen.​

which comes from the Hebrew​

ATEH MALKUTH VE-GEBURAH ​

VE-GEDULAH ​

LE-OLAM ​

AMEN​

Although it is probable that the qabbalah came into Europe as a result of the crusades, it is also moot that it may have occured in Spain. It is oft cited that the qabbalah is an oral tradition, but it is considered that the Zohar was first written down by Moses de Leon around the late C13th during the Muslim rule of al-Andalus, between 711-1492 C.E.. Despite this some people believe it has been a knowledge held since the days of Adam, having been taught to Adam Qadmon by the angels to facilitate his return to the supernal Eden.​

That's quite fascinating, Nehustan, Thank you for your input.

Dear Michel,

My faith does not speak of "temptation" much, rather it refers to such things as "tests". Tests of courage, tests of faith, test of whatever - in a spiritual sense - the temptation lies in giving into the tests, as a path of least resistance. Resistance, however is good for us. So some tests will come, it is inevitable. God assures us that we will not be tested past our own ability to overcome the tests. God does not "test to destruction". Even in the Biblical allegory of Job, Job was NOT destroyed.

Prayer, fasting (the Baha`i Fast), obedience protect one against tests, Since we are only tested in what we are of need.

I myself, have attempted to convince God that I have dealt with the tests of limited financial means all my life, and it should be time for Him to test me with wealth. He apparently does not agree.

"To the sincere ones, tests are as a gift from God, the Exalted, for a heroic person hasteneth, with the utmost joy and gladness, to the tests of a violent battlefield, but the coward is afraid and trembles and utters moaning and lamentation. Likewise, an expert student prepareth and memorizeth his lessons and exercises with the utmost effort, and in the day of examination he appeareth with infinite joy before the master. Likewise, the pure gold shineth radiantly in the fire of test. Consequently, it is made clear that for holy souls, trials are as the gift of God, the Exalted; but for weak souls they are an unexpected calamity. This test is just as thou hast written: it removeth the rust of egotism from the mirror of the heart until the Sun of Truth may shine therein. For, no veil is greater than egotism and no matter 372 how thin that covering may be, yet it will finally veil man entirely and prevent him from receiving a portion from the eternal bounty."
(Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 371)

Regards,
Scott

That is also very interesting, and thank you for your input,Scott.

 

[robtex]

Michel I think it can be seen well in the story of Adam and Eve and the presentation of "christian free will". He makes a garden puts an apple in there and says "don't eat it." The traditional arguement is that God gave man free will but I would argue that you can't really "give free will" by presenteing a penatly for using it as "eternal damnation".

An even intersting note when isolating your line is the theory of acceptance into eternal bliss. One must acknowledge the sacrfice of Christ. God has his own child tortured and murdered and only the acknowledgment of this act can one gain access into eternal life.

If you reject it eternal damnation. So you have this group of people who commit original sin because they are put into a senerio where temptation is high, the excuse being free will..if you are to concede that one can really have free will, if the accept the consequence of eternal damnation. To right that wrong and every temptation God put into the world after that mankind must relieve and personally, emotionally witness the torture and death of a man they love, who is the very son of God to get eternal life, the other default choice being again, eternal damnation. If you can call that a choice.

Makes me think the Christian God may have a bit of a mean streak in him.