The Lord's Prayer has been badly mistranslated for almost 2000 years, to devastating effect.

Hi ATS,

I'm hoping that this thread will advance the cause of Christ in our modern age of technocratic fascist tyrants; that it will help people feel good about God's care for them, amidst it all...

What I want to bring to the table this evening is a pure & simple fact - that the Lord's prayer has been badly mistranslated for almost 2,000 years, and even when the proper translations have appeared in certain Bible publications - the information hasn't filtered through to the common man/ woman in the street.

I know that when this new information hits home, it resolves one of the greatest theological errors that has ever blundered its way towards destroying the beliefs of tentative believers everywhere, who simply cannot reconcile what they understand by the concept of a good & loving God, with what appears to have been the 'correct' translation of the Lord's prayer, according to the prayer books & Bibles used by the particular denomination/s they have had contact with, or indeed, that which has been preached from the pulpit as 'gospel truth' - when in fact this one error has/had the potential to upend the way that people perceive the God of the Bible & Christian religion.

Here's the Lord's prayer as it has been taught to literally billions of people down the centuries:

“This, then, is how you should pray:

‘Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts,
as we also have forgiven our debtors.
And lead us not into temptation, - note this line..
but deliver us from the evil one

(For thine is the kingdom,
the power & the glory,
forever & ever, amen..)

NB - the final set of italicised lines are absent from the earliest Greek manuscripts & from the writings of the early Christian theologians/ saints/ scholars, and even the words: "the kingdom" are missing from the earliest manuscripts which DID include those other extra lines - a matter which I will come back to at the end of the thread...


Matthew 6: 9-13

Okay, so there are a couple of things to point out in relation to the final three lines quoted above, but the main point I wanted to make with this thread is very straightforward, and yet the error I'm highlighting is so monumentally damaging to the cause of Christian teaching & evangelising, I just can't fathom how nobody made a lot of noise regarding the matter, because it's scandalous that people en masse were never instructed with regards to the error it introduces into general taught & received Christian doctrine.

The problem is the line: "Lead us not into temptation.."

When I was a kid - and I guarantee that a lot of other people thought & felt about this in the exact same way - I would sit there in church, or in Sunday school, asking myself why on earth a Good & Loving God would ever want to lead someone down a pathway which was guaranteed to involve temptations which were of devilish risk to our immortal soul... It literally made me scared, because it pulled the rug from under my feet, in terms of trying to figure out who God was, and what His plans for me (& for Mankind more generally) included. Why would God deliberately put me in such peril? Surely He didn't want me to fail, right? But how could I be sure? No minister ever satisfactorily explained this line to me, and believe me I did ask them to.

Ultimately, it went in the box of 'reasons I don't believe in Christianity &/or Jesus as God'

Only a very many years later - long AFTER the moment I became a Christian as an adult, did I discover the true meaning & theological reasoning of that line, when I came across a less common translation (the New Living Translation, which is excellent, one of the best in my humble opinion), which expresses that infamous line as follows:

...And don’t let us yield to temptation, but rescue us from the evil one.

As you will no doubt see, this emphasises the correct relationship between God & Mankind - humans are being taught to ask God to strenthen them against the snares of temptation that we cannot totally avoid in our daily lives, and specifically we are taught to pray daily for help to be protected from evil forces should we ever come into contact with them in whatever unfortunate circumstances may occur while we live out our lives seeking to be good people, serving God. It's a healthy reminder that there is an Enemy at the gates, hence we should take care not to wander down dark paths, and of course we are taught to depend on God's strength for protection against those powerful evil forces/entities.

That's a much more theologically satisfying interpretation, and, I believe, it is the ONLY correct interpretation of the Lord's intent when He spoke those words in either Hebrew or Aramaic when delivering the prayer to His disciples, as a staple means of daily communication with God the Father. This prayer is what you pray as you open your time of communion with God (I use the word 'communion' as an indicator of meditation & listening for God's voice, I don't mean the bread & wine ceremony in this instance). We begin with the Lord's prayer, and then we move on to intercession for friends, family & even (some of) our enemies, before petitioning God with regards to our own personal needs, and lastly our personal desires, in terms of possible future blessing/s at God's discretion.

I think you will agree, it makes for a more rounded & wholesome, pragmatic opening prayer, rather than one which at one point or another gave all children in the church cause to doubt whether God was 'good', seeing as He was apparently in charge of leading us into deadly temptation. You can see how this could be deeply disturbing to a child whose [minister/ pastor/ sunday school teacher] doesn't seem to have an answer as to why God would do that to His beloved children.

I hope that I may have helped some people to overcome that particular unresolved theological trauma, now that we all understand what Jesus actually intended to express when He spoke those words on a hillside in Judea some 2,000 years ago.

Cheers,


FITO..

Mathew 6:7

"But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking."

The World English Bible translates the passage as: "In praying, don't use vain repetitions, as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their much speaking."

I wanted to edit this because I spoke ignorance, about the verse. I apparently need to do some thinking of these two verses.

a reply to: TooMuchTimeAndResearch

You're being rather inane with that comment - if you don't know me, why not ask questions of me rather than making a sweeping judgment based on your misinterpretation of what I've written in a single post?

I'm not into ritualistic prayer, I'm suggesting that some people use a template for their prayer time, a structure built around some staple part of their prayer life, something which they find brings them closer to God when they don't have the words to express how they're feeling. I'm suggesting that Jesus gave us the Lord's prayer to open up the world of prayer to people who weren't sure what to say at the start.

You are very wrong to rush into judgment.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

I know and agree with you. If you read my edit, i claimed my ignorance.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment


Ummm...whenever I recite..."The Lords Prayer"...I always say..."let us not be led into temptation"...

Works for me...

I always had an issue with that myself...hence changing it whenever I recite the prayer...








YouSir

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment
It's interesting that the version you give is different from the version I grew up with:

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.

Here's another correction of that problem phrase:

www.npr.org...

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Ok, well, found this.
www.gotquestions.org...

The phrase “for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever,” as part of the Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:13), is absent from the early Greek manuscripts like Sinaiticus (א) and Vaticanus (B), both 4th-century manuscripts; Bezae (D) from the 5th century; and Dublinensis (Z) from the 6th century. The absence of the phrase in these early Greek manuscripts is a significant evidence that the words were not original in Matthew’s Gospel. That it is absent in the writings of early theologians like Tertullian (2nd—3rd centuries), Origen (3rd century), Cyprian (3rd century), Ambrose (4th century), and Augustine (4th—5th centuries) also suggests that “for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever” was not originally included in the Lord’s Prayer.

Note: "it is absent in the writings of early theologians like Tertullian (2nd—3rd centuries), Origen (3rd century), Cyprian (3rd century), Ambrose (4th century), and Augustine (4th—5th centuries) also suggests that “for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever” was not originally included in the Lord’s Prayer." That tells me that the ending was added by Protestant reformers who broke from the Roman Catholic Church and in the process, they rejected the works of the Early Church Fathers and the various Councils, (Trent, etc.). That also explains the addition of the language in the KJV of the Bible.

As to the proper translation of "lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil", I am of the opinion that it is the correct translation, see: www.thecatholicthing.org...

A proper understanding of this petition is found in Jesus’ own life. His life exemplifies, and so becomes the interpretive key, to the authentic meaning of the petition. Moreover, as in Jesus’ life, the petition, “lead us not into temptation,” cannot be understood apart from “deliver us from evil.” Together they form one complete petition.When the Holy Spirit descended upon him at his baptism, Jesus undertook the salvific ministry that his Father now entrusted to him. This “embracing” is why his Father declares: “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” (Mt. 3:17) Jesus, as the anointed Messiah, would be the Father’s loyal, obedient Son by becoming the Father’s saving suffering-servant. (see Is. 42:1 and Ps. 2:7)

Significantly, Jesus immediately “was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.” (Mt. 4:1; Mark 1:12 states more strongly that “the Spirit immediately drove him into the wilderness.”) Is the Father, through the Holy Spirit, thrusting Jesus into the tempting hands of the devil? No. The very Spirit-filled commissioning of Jesus to be the salvific suffering-servant brings its own temptation, its own testing.

Fear of the suffering entailed in being the messianic servant naturally arises within Jesus’ humanity, and in the face of this fear, he is confronted with temptation. Would he not prefer his own messianic self-aggrandizement, a worldly exaltation that bears no pain? By fending off the devil’s temptations, Jesus refuses to seek worldly glory and prestige – the gaining of the whole world. He would remain true to the salvific ministry given to him by his Father.Being the loyal and obedient suffering-servant-Son leads Jesus to the Garden of Gethsemane. Here we find a stark contrast between Jesus and his apostles. His fateful hour has arrived and Jesus knows that his Father is leading him to the cross. This very “leading” is leading him into temptation, and so he prays to his Father that he be not led into temptation but that he be delivered from evil. Moreover, he exhorts his apostles to pray lest they too “enter into temptation.” (Mt. 26:41) Jesus, because of his prayer, will overcome his temptation. The apostles, not having prayed, will fall.

While he desperately wants to be delivered from the evil of the cross, Jesus ultimately rejects his own tempting heart – “My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done.” (Mt. 26:42) Jesus knows that his Father sent him into the world for this very hour. “Now is my soul troubled.” And yet “what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour?’ No, for this purpose I have come to this hour.” (Jn. 12:27)

To sum up:

What we now can see is the inherent conjoining of “lead us not into temptation” and “deliver us from evil.” While the doing of his Father’s will led him into temptation, yet Jesus firmly trusted that his Father would deliver him from death and raise him to the newness of everlasting life.

Thus, there is not only a present component to this petition, the present freeing from the temptation and the present deliverance, but also, and more importantly, an intrinsic eschatological component within this conjoined petition, the final liberation from all temptation in the definitive delivering from all evil. This final deliverance consists in resurrected glory, the reward for doing the Father’s will. This understanding is what Jesus wants us to grasp when he taught us to pray the Our Father.

Since we are enjoined to be in the world, not of it, much of life is temptation especially as Satan rules it.

When a faithful person speaks with their God, the recitation is ultimately irrelevant.

Finding that people are litigious in nature, and attention to language forms are contextually important, we will forever be reviewing the past and reevaluating what some words "meant." But the truth is, we are unlikely to know what the contemporary gist of a word is unless we have robust examples of their use. We don't have an extensive library of written language, certainly not 'casual or common conversations.'

Analogous examples could be mustered from numerous ancient and new languages, including our own.

So, maybe we have technically been "doing it wrong" for many centuries, but if we are to agree that one party in the conversation is God, there can be no doubt about the intention versus the technicality, if anyone can sort that out, God can.

I think what Jesus wanted us to grasp has not been lost in the eons of translational history. But of course, that is purely a matter of faith.

does your problem start with the translation into English as each English dialect had their own version and cultural baggage.

Its through this variety and mistranslations we get witch meaning midwife, horse whisperer and to also mean a topographical feature of land that floods** in the south Saxon dialect the word Pharisees translates as fairies so the bible was used as evidence fairies existed well into the 19trh century.

*where a witch is a topographical feature there where only ever 2 witch trials and even then the guilty where put in gaol for poisoning not magic.. but it also feathers into our ideas that you find witches in marshland

the bible has huge swathes of cultural baggage that'll make little sense to the modern reader..

the phrase lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil

is an open invitation for the supernatural being to over-ride the 'free will' clause given to each individual as a Right

making the petitioner a 'shirker'

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

That understanding has always been clear to me. Obviously, God will not "lead us into temptation. I can't see how anyone could take it otherwise.

James 1 says:

[ex]
13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.


I don't see the Bible as being self-contradictory. The passage in Matthew 6 clearly does not teach that God the Father actually leads us into temptation. I have always clearly understood the petition to be exactly what you say, that it is asking Our Father in Heaven to simply succor us when "each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed." God does not tempt anyone by evil.

To me, it couldn't be more clear.

As I often say, the Bible is the best interpreter of the Bible. In Acts 20, Paul tells the Ephesian elders:

...27 for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.

The entire counsel of scripture must be taken into consideration when approaching any passage that may seem a bit confusing. It's the difference between shining a flashlight on a spot in a room and turning on the overhead light. The scriptures make clear the scriptures.

Now, we will de tempted; that's the nature of life in this world. Matthew 18:7 says:

“Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!
[/ex]

Luke 17:1 echos the same idea:

And he said to his disciples, “Temptations to sin[a] are sure to come, but woe to the one through whom they come!

Temptations do not come from God, do not come through God. They come because we are idiots and let ourselves be led away. We must ask the Father to protect us from those temptation, to essentially lead us away like a loving father would lead his child away from danger. The problem is that like an ornry, rebellious child we often choose to let go of His hand and run toward our own destruction.

originally posted by: St Udio


the phrase lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil

is an open invitation for the supernatural being to over-ride the 'free will' clause given to each individual as a Right

making the petitioner a 'shirker'

My children, being foolish and inexperienced, would sometimes put themselves in harm's way. I, as a loving father, would try to lead them away from harm.

If my child were to get too close to the hot wood-burning stove, I'd be expected to tell them to back off. That neither makes me an "over-rider of their free will" nor makes the "shirkers." It establishes a loving, protective relationship between father and child.

If I ask God to help me overcome temptation, I am not asking him to override my free will. On the contrary, my will is to not sin, but I find myself weak in my own moral character, like an alchoholic who calls his sponsor when faced with temptation to drink. If you want to sin, that is your preogative. God will not stand in your way. But if it is my will to no fall into temptation regardless of my own character weakness, He is "an ever present help in times of trouble."

originally posted by: ketsuko
Since we are enjoined to be in the world, not of it, much of life is temptation especially as Satan rules it.

But the disciple of Christ, no longer being a citizen of this world system, has an Aid whom he or she can implore for help against the enemy of our souls. This is what the prayer clearly means.

Is it REALLLLY badly 'mistranslated' and if so, is it that big of a deal? My understanding is that it is an example on how to pray. In reading Matthew 6, there are several examples of what to do/not do when fasting, not to worry etc.

All those are simply examples on how one should or should not perform certain actions. It's more instructional than DO THIS EXACTLY LIKE THIS! Am I sinning if I never say the Lord's prayer? What about fasting? Oh, and then there's worry....

I believe the message in Matthew 6 is to show that worshipping and talking to God, however we do it, is a personal thing, should come from the heart and shouldn't be flaunted in public. Especially as not to draw attention of others in what we are doing, in essence attempting to find favor in their eyes as it is ONLY God's opinion that matters.

I'm not going to worry about getting it 'wrong' if my heart is in the right place and I'm not seeking the approval or attention of other humans but instead, trying to please God and Him alone.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

but deliver us from the evil one

It was just "deliver us from the evil" where i hail from.

As to the italics part, yes we said that also.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

The Lord's Prayer has been badly mistranslated for almost 2000 years, to devastating effect.

If they can't even translate the Lords Prayer correctly; what else in the KJV has been mistranslated?

If the Bible is Divinely inspired, are the translators also Divinely inspired as well?

The original Greek is given and discussed briefly here:

newcriterion.com...

It appears that the English translation currently used is correct, that there is context to it (Jesus led into temptation), and that even the Vulgate agrees with both.

However, I'm not a Biblical scholar, so I leave it to those who know common Greek (and Latin, if you want to talk about the reference to the Vulgate, too) and disagree to correct what Mr. Grimbilas said.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

You can't put too much weight into the transliterated hell that is most scripture. Especially all the stuff from the 2nd Temple era written during Archaemenid Annexation. Sorta like how Isaiah 14:12 was originally mocking the King of Babylon getting deposed by the Persians. There's about 19 versions of it today.

But this is NT, so assuming a composition around 70 CE, it was likely originally in Greek, with a possibility of Aramaic being the first language used.

But go with greek, as that's the concensus:

9b Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου·

10 ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου· γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ της γῆς·

11 τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·

12 καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν·

13 καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ.

ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν.

Transliterated as:

9b Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name;

10 Your kingdom come, your will be done, as it is in heaven and on earth.

11 Give us this day our daily bread;

12 And forgave us our debts, as we also forgave our debtors;

13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.