Hubbry Logo
Lord's PrayerLord's PrayerMain
Open search
Lord's Prayer
Community hub
Lord's Prayer
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Lord's Prayer
Lord's Prayer
Lord's Prayer
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The Lord's Prayer (Le Pater Noster), by James Tissot

The Lord's Prayer, also known by its incipit Our Father (Greek: Πάτερ ἡμῶν, Latin: Pater Noster), is a central Christian prayer attributed to Jesus. It contains petitions to God focused on God's holiness, will, and kingdom, as well as human needs, with variations across manuscripts and Christian traditions.

Two versions of this prayer are recorded in the gospels: a longer form within the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew, and a shorter form in the Gospel of Luke when "one of his disciples said to him, 'Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples.'"[1] Scholars generally agree that the differences between the Matthaean and Lucan versions of the Lord's Prayer reflect independent developments from a common source. The first-century text Didache (at chapter VIII) reports a version closely resembling that of Matthew and the modern prayer. It ends with the Minor Doxology.[2]

Theologians broadly view the Lord's Prayer as a model that aligns the soul with God's will, emphasizing praise, trust, and ethical living. The prayer is used by most Christian denominations in their worship and, with few exceptions, the liturgical form is the Matthean version. It has been set to music for use in liturgical services.

Since the 16th century, the Lord's Prayer has been widely translated and collected to compare languages across regions and history. The Lord's Prayer shares thematic and linguistic parallels with prayers and texts from various religious traditions—including the Hebrew Bible, Jewish post-biblical prayers, and ancient writings like the Dhammapada and the Epic of Gilgamesh—though some elements, such as "Lead us not into temptation," have unique theological nuances without direct Old Testament counterparts. Music from 9th century Gregorian chants to modern works by Christopher Tin has used the Lord's Prayer in various religious and interfaith ceremonies.

Texts

[edit]

The text of the Lord's Prayer shown here is from the New International Version (NIV).

Matthew 6:9-13[3] Luke 11:2-4[4]
Our Father in heaven, Father, [Some manuscripts 'Our Father in heaven']
hallowed be your name, hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come, your kingdom come.
your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. [Some manuscripts 'come. May your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.']
Give us today our daily bread. Give us each day our daily bread.
And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. [Greek 'everyone who is indebted to us']
And lead us not into temptation, [The Greek for 'temptation' can also mean 'testing'.] but deliver us from the evil one. [Or 'from evil'] And lead us not into temptation. [Some manuscripts 'temptation, but deliver us from the evil one']
[some late manuscripts 'one, / for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.']

Initial words on the topic from the Catechism of the Catholic Church teach that it "is truly the summary of the whole gospel".[5]

The first three of the seven petitions in Matthew address God; the other four are related to human needs and concerns. Matthew's account alone includes the "Your will be done" and the "Rescue us from the evil one" (or "Deliver us from evil") petitions. Both original Greek texts contain the adjective epiousion; while controversial, 'daily' has been the most common English-language translation of this word. Protestants usually conclude the prayer with a doxology (in some versions, "For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever, Amen"), a later addition appearing in some manuscripts of Matthew. The Eastern Orthodox version is: For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Relationship between the Matthaean and Lucan texts

[edit]

In biblical criticism, the absence of the Lord's Prayer in the Gospel of Mark, together with its occurrence in Matthew and Luke, has caused scholars who accept the two-source hypothesis (against other document hypotheses) to conclude that it is probably a logion original to the Q source.[6] According to W.D. Davies and Dale Allison, it is also possible than one version was present in Q and another from the M source or the L source, though they do not view the notion that Luke's version used Matthew as plausible.[7] The common source of the two existing versions, whether Q or an oral or another written tradition, was elaborated differently in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke.

Marianus Pale Hera considers it unlikely that either of the two used the other as its source and that it is possible that they "preserve two versions of the Lord's Prayer used in two different communities: the Matthean in a Jewish Christian community and the Lucan in the Gentile Christian community".[8] Davies and Allison find this theory to be possible as well.[9]

If either source built on the other, Joachim Jeremias attributes priority to Matthew on the grounds that "in the early period, before wordings were fixed, liturgical texts were elaborated, expanded and enriched".[10] On the other hand, Michael Goulder, Thomas J. Mosbo and Ken Olson see the shorter Lucan version as a reworking of the Matthaean text, removing unnecessary verbiage and repetition.[11]

The Matthaean version is the one most common in general Christian usage.[12]

Greek texts

[edit]
Liturgical text Codex Vaticanus text Didache text[13]
πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς πατερ ημων ο εν τοις ουρανοις πατερ ημων ο εν τω ουρανω
ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου αγιασθητω το ονομα σου αγιασθητω το ονομα σου
ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου ελθετω η βασιλεια σου ελθετω η βασιλεια σου
γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς γενηθητω το θελημα σου ως εν ουρανω και επι γης γενηθητω το θελημα σου ως εν ουρανω και επι γης
τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον τον αρτον ημων τον επιουσιον δος ημιν σημερον τον αρτον ημων τον επιουσιον δος ημιν σημερον
καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφίεμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν και αφες ημιν τα οφειληματα ημων ως και ημεις αφηκαμεν τοις οφειλεταις ημων και αφες ημιν την οφειλην ημων ως και ημεις αφιεμεν τοις οφειλεταις ημων
καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ και μη εισενεγκης ημας εις πειρασμον αλλα ρυσαι ημας απο του πονηρου και μη εισενεγκης ημας εις πειρασμον αλλα ρυσαι ημας απο του πονηρου

The majority percentage of the verbs are aorist imperatives. In the first part of the prayer there are third person passive imperatives, while in the last one there are second person active imperatives.[14]

Original Greek text and Syriac and Latin translations

[edit]

Standard edition of the Greek text

[edit]

The text given here is that of the latest edition of Greek New Testament of the United Bible Societies and in the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece.[15] Most modern translations use a text similar to this one. Most older translations are based on a Byzantine-type text with ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς in line 5 (verse 10) instead of ἐπὶ γῆς, and ἀφίεμεν in line 8 (verse 12) instead of ἀφήκαμεν, and adding at the end (verse 13) the doxology ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν.

  1. πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς
    (páter hēmôn ho en toîs ouranoîs)
  2. ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου
    (hagiasthḗtō tò ónomá sou)
  3. ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου
    (elthétō hē basileía sou)
  4. γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς
    (genēthḗtō tò thélēmá sou hōs en ouranô(i) kaì epì gês)
  5. τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον
    (tòn árton hēmôn tòn epioúsion dòs hēmîn sḗmeron)
  6. καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν
    (kaì áphes hēmîn tà opheilḗmata hēmôn hōs kaì hēmeîs aphḗkamen toîs opheilétais hēmôn)
  7. καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ
    (kaì mḕ eisenénkēis hēmâs eis peirasmón allà rhŷsai hēmâs apò toû ponēroû)

Standard edition of the Syriac text of the Peshitta

[edit]

The Classical Syriac vowels here transcribed as "ê", "ā" and "o/ō" have been raised to "i", "o" and "u" respectively in Western Syriac.[16]

  1. ܐܒ݂ܘܢ ܕ̇ܒ݂ܫܡܝܐ‎
    (ʾăḇūn d-ḇa-šmayyā)
  2. ܢܬ݂ܩܕ݁ܫ ܫܡܟ݂‎
    (neṯqaddaš šmāḵ)
  3. ܬ݁ܐܬ݂ܐ ܡܠܟ݁ܘܬ݂ܟ݂‎
    (têṯē malkūṯāḵ)
  4. ܢܗܘܐ ܨܒ݂ܝܢܟ݂ ܐܝܟ݁ܢܐ ܕ݂ܒ݂ܫܡܝܐ ܐܦ݂ ܒ݁ܐܪܥܐ‎
    (nēhwē ṣeḇyānāḵ ʾaykannā ḏ-ḇa-šmayyā ʾāp̄ b-ʾarʿā)
  5. ܗܒ݂ ܠܢ ܠܚܡܐ ܕ݂ܣܘܢܩܢܢ ܝܘܡܢܐ‎
    (haḇ lan laḥmā ḏ-sūnqānan yawmānā)
  6. ܘܫܒ݂ܘܩ ܠܢ ܚܘ̈ܒ݁ܝܢ ܐܝܟܢܐ ܕ݂ܐܦ݂ ܚܢܢ ܫܒ݂ܩܢ ܠܚܝ̈ܒ݂ܝܢ‎
    (wa-šḇoq lan ḥawbayn ʾaykannā ḏ-ʾāp̄ ḥnan šḇaqn l-ḥayyāḇayn)
  7. ܘܠܐ ܬ݂ܥܠܢ ܠܢܣܝܘܢܐ ܐܠܐ ܦ݂ܨܢ ܡܢ ܒ݁ܝܫܐ‎
    (w-lā ṯaʿlan l-nesyōnā ʾellā p̄aṣṣān men bīšā)

Vulgata Clementina (1692)

[edit]

There are four editions of the Vulgate:[17] the Sixtine Vulgate, the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate, the Nova Vulgata, and the Stuttgart Vulgate. The Clementine edition varies from the Nova Vulgata in this place only in punctuation and in having "ne nos inducas" in place of "ne inducas nos". The Stuttgart Vulgate has "qui in caelis es" in place of "qui es in caelis"; "veniat" in place of "adveniat"; "dimisimus" in place of "dimittimus"; and "temptationem" in place of "tentationem".

  1. pater noster qui es in cælis
  2. sanctificetur nomen tuum
  3. adveniat regnum tuum
  4. fiat voluntas tua sicut in cælo et in terra
  5. panem nostrum supersubstantialem da nobis hodie
  6. et dimitte nobis debita nostra sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris
  7. et ne nos inducas in tentationem sed libera nos a malo[a]

The doxology associated with the Lord's Prayer in Byzantine Greek texts is found in four Vetus Latina manuscripts, only two of which give it in its entirety. The other surviving manuscripts of the Vetus Latina Gospels do not have the doxology. The Vulgate translation also does not include it, thus agreeing with critical editions of the Greek text.

Liturgical texts: Greek, Syriac, Latin

[edit]
The Lord's Prayer (Latin liturgical text) with Gregorian chant annotation
Pater Noster
The Lord's Prayer sung in Gregorian chant

English versions

[edit]
Main article: History of the Lord's Prayer in English
Lord's Prayer from the 1845 illuminated book of The Sermon on the Mount, designed by Owen Jones

There are several different English translations of the Lord's Prayer from Greek or Latin, beginning around AD 650 with the Northumbrian translation. Of those in current liturgical use, the three best-known are:

All these versions are based on the text in Matthew, rather than Luke, of the prayer given by Jesus.

Book of Common Prayer, 1662

[edit]

Our Father, which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name;
Thy kingdom come;
Thy will be done
in earth, as it is in heaven:
Give us this day our daily bread;
And forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive them that trespass against us;
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil;
For thine is the kingdom,
the power, and the glory,
For ever and ever.
Amen.

— BCP (1662)[22]

Traditional ecumenical version

[edit]

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.

Most Protestants conclude with the doxology:
For thine is the kingdom,
the power, and the glory,
for ever and ever. Amen. (or ...forever. Amen.)

At Mass in the Catholic Church the embolism is followed by:
For the kingdom,
the power and the glory are yours,
now and for ever.

— Traditional ecumenical version[23][24][25][26]

1988 English Language Liturgical Consultation

[edit]

Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as in heaven.
Give us today our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins
as we forgive those who sin against us.
Save us from the time of trial
and deliver us from evil.
For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours
now and for ever. Amen.

— 1988 ELLC[27][28]

The concluding doxology ("For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory for ever") is representative of the practice of concluding prayers with a short, hymn-like verse that exalts the glory of God. Older English translations of the Bible, based on late Byzantine Greek manuscripts, included it, but it is absent in the oldest manuscripts and is not considered to be part of the original text of Matthew 6:9–13.[29] The translators of the 1611 King James Bible assumed that a Greek manuscript they possessed was ancient and therefore adopted the text into the Lord's Prayer of the Gospel of Matthew. The use of the doxology in English dates from at least 1549 with the First Prayer Book of Edward VI which was influenced by William Tyndale's New Testament translation in 1526.

In the Byzantine Rite, whenever a priest is officiating, after the Lord's Prayer he intones this augmented form of the doxology, "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.",[k] and in either instance, reciter(s) of the prayer reply "Amen".

The Catholic Latin liturgical rites have never attached the doxology to the end of the Lord's Prayer. The doxology does appear in the Roman Rite Mass as revised in 1969. After the conclusion of the Lord's Prayer, the priest says a prayer known as the embolism. In the official International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) English translation, the embolism reads: "Deliver us, Lord, we pray, from every evil, graciously grant peace in our days, that, by the help of your mercy, we may be always free from sin and safe from all distress, as we await the blessed hope and the coming of our Saviour, Jesus Christ." This elaborates on the final petition, "Deliver us from evil." The people then respond to this with the doxology: "For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours, now and forever."[23]

Analysis

[edit]
The Lord's Prayer in Greek

Augustine of Hippo gives the following analysis of the Lord's Prayer, which elaborates on Jesus' words just before it in the Gospel of Matthew: "Your Father knows what you need before you ask him. Pray then in this way" (Matthew 6:8–9):[30]

We need to use words (when we pray) so that we may remind ourselves to consider carefully what we are asking, not so that we may think we can instruct the Lord or prevail on him. When we say: "Hallowed be your name", we are reminding ourselves to desire that his name, which in fact is always holy, should also be considered holy among men. [...] But this is a help for men, not for God. [...] And as for our saying: "Your kingdom come," it will surely come whether we will it or not. But we are stirring up our desires for the kingdom so that it can come to us and we can deserve to reign there. [...] When we say: "Deliver us from evil," we are reminding ourselves to reflect on the fact that we do not yet enjoy the state of blessedness in which we shall suffer no evil. [...] It was very appropriate that all these truths should be entrusted to us to remember in these very words. Whatever be the other words we may prefer to say (words which the one praying chooses so that his disposition may become clearer to himself or which he simply adopts so that his disposition may be intensified), we say nothing that is not contained in the Lord's Prayer, provided of course we are praying in a correct and proper way.

This excerpt from Augustine is included in the Office of Readings in the Catholic Liturgy of the Hours.[31]

Many have written biblical commentaries on the Lord's Prayer.[32][33][34][35] Contained below are a variety of selections from some of those commentaries.

Introduction

[edit]
This subheading and those that follow use the 1662 Book of Common Prayer (BCP) (see above)

Our Father, which art in heaven

"Our" indicates that the prayer is that of a group of people who consider themselves children of God and who call God their "Father". "In heaven" indicates that the Father who is addressed is distinct from human fathers on earth.[36]

Augustine interpreted "heaven" (coelum, sky) in this context as meaning "in the hearts of the righteous, as it were in His holy temple".[37]

First Petition

[edit]

Hallowed be thy Name;

See also: Names of God in Christianity and Matthew 6:9

Former archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams explains this phrase as a petition that people may look upon God's name as holy, as something that inspires awe and reverence, and that they may not trivialize it by making God a tool for their purposes, to "put other people down, or as a sort of magic to make themselves feel safe". He sums up the meaning of the phrase by saying: "Understand what you're talking about when you're talking about God, this is serious, this is the most wonderful and frightening reality that we could imagine, more wonderful and frightening than we can imagine."[38]

Richard Challoner writes that: "[t]his petition claims the first place in the Lord's prayer [...]; because the first and principal duty of a Christian is, to love his God with his whole heart and soul, and therefore the first and principal thing he ought to desire and pray for is, the great honor and glory of God."[39]

Second Petition

[edit]

Thy kingdom come;

See also: Matthew 6:10

"This petition has its parallel in the Jewish prayer, 'May he establish his Kingdom during your life and during your days.'"[40] In the gospels Jesus speaks frequently of God's kingdom, but never defines the concept: "He assumed this was a concept so familiar that it did not require definition."[41] Concerning how Jesus' audience in the gospels would have understood him, George Eldon Ladd turns to the concept's Hebrew biblical background: "The Hebrew word malkuth [...] refers first to a reign, dominion, or rule and only secondarily to the realm over which a reign is exercised. [...] When malkuth is used of God, it almost always refers to his authority or to his rule as the heavenly King."[42] This petition looks to the perfect establishment of God's rule in the world in the future, an act of God resulting in the eschatological order of the new age.[43]

The Catholic Church believes that, by praying the Lord's prayer, a Christian hastens the Second Coming.[44] Like the church, some denominations see the coming of God's kingdom as a divine gift to be prayed for, not a human achievement. Others believe that the Kingdom will be fostered by the hands of those faithful who work for a better world. These believe that Jesus' commands to feed the hungry and clothe the needy make the seeds of the kingdom already present on earth (Lk 8:5–15; Mt 25:31–40).

Hilda C. Graef notes that the operative Greek word, basileia, means both kingdom and kingship (i.e., reign, dominion, governing, etc.), but that the English word kingdom loses this double meaning.[45] Kingship adds a psychological meaning to the petition: one is also praying for the condition of soul where one follows God's will.

Richard Challoner, commenting on this petition, notes that the kingdom of God can be understood in three ways: 1) of the eternal kingdom of God in heaven. 2) of the spiritual kingdom of Christ, in his Church upon earth. 3) of the mystical kingdom of God, in our souls, according to the words of Christ, "The kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21).[46]

Third Petition

[edit]
"Thy will be done" redirects here. For the American heavy metal band, see Thy Will Be Done. For the 2015 Nigerian film, see Thy Will Be Done (film).

Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven:

See also: Matthew 6:10

According to William Barclay, this phrase is a couplet with the same meaning as "Thy kingdom come". Barclay argues that "the kingdom is a state of things on earth in which God's will is as perfectly done as it is in heaven. ...To do the will of God and to be in the Kingdom of God are one and the same thing."[47]

John Ortberg interprets this phrase as follows: "Many people think our job is to get my afterlife destination taken care of, then tread water till we all get ejected and God comes back and torches this place. But Jesus never told anybody – neither his disciples nor us – to pray, 'Get me out of here so I can go up there.' His prayer was, 'Make up there come down here.' Make things down here run the way they do up there."[48] Stephen Cottrell makes the same point in his reflections on "Thy Kingdom Come": "the promise of the gospel isn't really us going up to heaven, but heaven coming down to earth".[49] The request that "thy will be done" is God's invitation to "join him in making things down here the way they are up there".[48]

Fourth Petition

[edit]

Give us this day our daily [epiousion] bread;

See also: Matthew 6:11
See also: Epiousion

As mentioned earlier, the original word ἐπιούσιος (epiousion), commonly characterized as daily, is unique to the Lord's Prayer in all of ancient Greek literature. The word is almost a hapax legomenon, occurring only in Luke and Matthew's versions of the Lord's Prayer, and nowhere else in any other extant Greek texts. While epiousion is often substituted by the word "daily", all other New Testament translations from the Greek into "daily" otherwise reference hemeran (ἡμέραν, "the day"), which does not appear in this usage.[citation needed]

Jerome by linguistic parsing translated "ἐπιούσιον" (epiousion) as "supersubstantialem" in the Gospel of Matthew, but as "cotidianum" ("daily") in the Gospel of Luke. This wide-ranging difference with respect to meaning of epiousion is discussed in detail in the current Catechism of the Catholic Church in an inclusive approach toward tradition as well as a literal one for meaning: "Taken in a temporal sense, this word is a pedagogical repetition of 'this day', to confirm us in trust 'without reservation'. Taken in the qualitative sense, it signifies what is necessary for life, and more broadly every good thing sufficient for subsistence. Taken literally (epi-ousios: 'super-essential'), it refers directly to the Bread of Life, the Body of Christ, the 'medicine of immortality,' without which we have no life within us."[50]

Epiousion is translated as supersubstantialem in the Vulgate Matthew 6:11[51] and accordingly as supersubstantial in the Douay–Rheims Bible Matthew 6:11.[52]

Barclay M. Newman's A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, published in a revised edition in 2010 by the United Bible Societies, has the following entry:

ἐπι|ούσιος, ον (εἰμί) of doubtful meaning, for today; for the coming day; necessary for existence.[53]

It thus derives the word from the preposition ἐπί (epi) and the verb εἰμί (eimi), from the latter of which are derived words such as οὐσία (ousia), the range of whose meanings is indicated in A Greek–English Lexicon.[54]

Fifth Petition

[edit]

And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us;

See also: Matthew 6:12

Although Matthew 6:12 uses the term debts, most older English versions of the Lord's Prayer use the term trespasses, while ecumenical versions often use the term sins. The last choice may be due to Luke 11:4,[55] which uses the word sins, while the former may be due to Matthew 6:14 (immediately after the text of the prayer), where Jesus speaks of trespasses. As early as the third century, Origen of Alexandria used the word trespasses (παραπτώματα) in the prayer.

The Latin form that was traditionally used in Western Europe has debita (debts), but most English-speaking Christians (except Scottish Presbyterians and some others of the Dutch Reformed tradition) use trespasses.[56] For example, the Church of Scotland, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Reformed Church in America, as well as some Congregational heritage churches in the United Church of Christ follow the version found in Matthew 6 in the King James Version (KJV), which in the prayer uses the words debts and debtors.

The Presbyterian and other Reformed churches tend to use the rendering "forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors". Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans and Methodists are more likely to say "trespasses... those who trespass against us".[57]

The "debts" form appears in the first English translation of the Bible, by John Wycliffe in 1395 (Wycliffe spelling "dettis"). The "trespasses" version appears in the 1526 translation by William Tyndale (Tyndale spelling "treaspases"). In 1549 the first Book of Common Prayer in English used a version of the prayer with "trespasses". This became the "official" version used in Anglican congregations. On the other hand, the 1611 King James Version, the version specifically authorized for the Church of England, has "forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors".

After the request for bread, Matthew and Luke diverge slightly. Matthew continues with a request for debts to be forgiven in the same manner as people have forgiven those who have debts against them. Luke, on the other hand, makes a similar request about sins being forgiven in the manner of debts being forgiven between people. The word "debts" (ὀφειλήματα) does not necessarily mean financial obligations, as shown by the use of the verbal form of the same word (ὀφείλετε) in passages such as Romans 13:8.[58] The Aramaic word ḥôbâ can mean "debt" or "sin".[59][60] This difference between Luke's and Matthew's wording could be explained by the original form of the prayer having been in Aramaic. The generally accepted interpretation is thus that the request is for forgiveness of sin, not of supposed loans granted by God.[61] Asking for forgiveness from God was a staple of Jewish prayers (e.g., Penitential Psalms). It was also considered proper for individuals to be forgiving of others, so the sentiment expressed in the prayer would have been a common one of the time.[citation needed]

Anthony C. Deane, Canon of Worcester Cathedral, suggested that the choice of the word "ὀφειλήματα" (debts), rather than "ἁμαρτίας" (sins), indicates a reference to failures to use opportunities of doing good. He linked this with the parable of the sheep and the goats (also in Matthew's Gospel), in which the grounds for condemnation are not wrongdoing in the ordinary sense, but failure to do right, missing opportunities for showing love to others.[62][63]

"As we forgive ...". Divergence between Matthew's "debts" and Luke's "sins" is relatively trivial compared to the impact of the second half of this statement. The verses immediately following the Lord's Prayer, Matthew 6:14–15[64] show Jesus teaching that the forgiveness of our sin/debt (by God) is linked with how we forgive others, as in the Parable of the Unforgiving Servant Matthew 18:23–35,[65] which Matthew gives later. R. T. France comments:

The point is not so much that forgiving is a prior condition of being forgiven, but that forgiving cannot be a one-way process. Like all God's gifts it brings responsibility; it must be passed on. To ask for forgiveness on any other basis is hypocrisy. There can be no question, of course, of our forgiving being in proportion to what we are forgiven, as 18:23–35 makes clear.

— R. T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction and Commentary[66]

Sixth Petition

[edit]

And lead us not into temptation,

See also: Matthew 6:13

Interpretations of the penultimate petition of the prayer – not to be led by God into peirasmos – vary considerably. The range of meanings of the Greek word "πειρασμός" (peirasmos) is illustrated in New Testament Greek lexicons.[67] In different contexts it can mean temptation, testing, trial, experiment. Although the traditional English translation uses the word "temptation" and Carl Jung saw God as actually leading people astray,[68] Christians generally interpret the petition as not contradicting James 1:13–14: "Let no one say when he is tempted, 'I am being tempted by God', for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire."[69] Some see the petition as an eschatological appeal against unfavourable Last Judgment, a theory supported by the use of the word "peirasmos" in this sense in Revelation 3:10.[70] Others see it as a plea against hard tests described elsewhere in scripture, such as those of Job.[l] It is also read as: "Do not let us be led (by ourselves, by others, by Satan) into temptations". Tertullian comments: "For the completeness of so brief a prayer He added — in order that we should supplicate not touching the remitting merely, but touching the entire averting, of acts of guilt — Lead us not into temptation: that is, suffer us not to be led into it, by him (of course) who tempts; but far be the thought that the Lord should seem to tempt, as if He either were ignorant of the faith of any, or else were eager to overthrow it. Infirmity and malice are characteristics of the Devil...The final clause, therefore, is consonant, and interprets the sense of Lead us not into temptation; for this sense is, But convey us away from the Evil One." (On Prayer, Ch. VIII)[71][72] Coherently, Saint Cyprian of Carthago translates Matthew 6:9 as follows: And suffer us not to be led into temptation; but deliver us from evil. (On the Lord's Prayer, n. 7)[73]

Since it follows shortly after a plea for daily bread (i.e., material sustenance), it is also seen as referring to not being caught up in the material pleasures given. A similar phrase appears in Matthew 26:41[74] and Luke 22:40[75] in connection with the prayer of Jesus in Gethsemane.[76]

Joseph Smith, the founder of the Latter Day Saint movement, in a version of the Holy Bible which was not published before his death, used: "And suffer us not to be led into temptation".[77]

In a conversation on the Italian TV channel TV2000 on 6 December 2017, Pope Francis commented that the then Italian wording of this petition (similar to the traditional English) was a poor translation. He said "the French" (i.e., the Bishops' Conference of France) had changed the petition to "Do not let us fall in/into temptation". He was referring to the 2017 change to a new French version, Et ne nous laisse pas entrer en tentation ("Do not let us enter into temptation"), but spoke of it in terms of the Spanish translation, no nos dejes caer en la tentación ("do not let us fall in/into temptation"), that he was accustomed to recite in Argentina before his election as Pope. He explained: "I am the one who falls; it's not him [God] pushing me into temptation to then see how I have fallen".[78][79][80] Anglican theologian Ian Paul said that such a proposal was "stepping into a theological debate about the nature of evil".[81]

In January 2018, after "in-depth study", the German Bishops' Conference rejected any rewording of their translation of the Lord's Prayer.[82][83]

In November 2018, the Episcopal Conference of Italy adopted a new edition of the Messale Romano, the Italian translation of the Roman Missal. One of the changes made from the older (1983) edition was to render this petition as non abbandonarci alla tentazione ("do not abandon us to temptation").[84][85] This was approved by Pope Francis; however, there are no current plans to make a similar change for the English translation as of 2019.[needs update][82] The Italian-speaking Union of Methodist and Waldensian Churches maintains its translation of the petition: non esporci alla tentazione ("do not expose us to temptation").[86]

Seventh Petition

[edit]
"Deliver us from evil" redirects here. For other uses, see Deliver Us from Evil.

But deliver[87] us from evil:[18]

See also: Matthew 6:13

Translations and scholars are divided over whether the final word here refers to "evil" in general or "the evil one" (the devil) in particular. In the original Greek, as well as in the Latin translation, the word could be either of neuter (evil in general) or masculine (the evil one) gender. Matthew's version of the prayer appears in the Sermon on the Mount, in earlier parts of which the term is used to refer to general evil. Later parts of Matthew refer to the devil when discussing similar issues. However, the devil is never referred to as the evil one in any known Aramaic sources. While John Calvin accepted the vagueness of the term's meaning, he considered that there is little real difference between the two interpretations, and that therefore the question is of no real consequence. Similar phrases are found in John 17:15[88] and Thessalonians 3:3.[89][90]

Doxology

[edit]

For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory,
For ever and ever. Amen.

See also: Matthew 6:13

Content

[edit]

The doxology sometimes attached to the prayer in English is similar to a passage in 1 Chronicles 29:11 – "Yours, O LORD, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is yours. Yours is the kingdom, O LORD, and you are exalted as head above all."[91][92] It is also similar to the paean to King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon in Daniel 2:37 – "You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory".[93][92][94]

The doxology has been interpreted as connected with the final petition: "Deliver us from evil". The kingdom, the power and the glory are the Father's, not of our antagonist's, who is subject to him to whom Christ will hand over the kingdom after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power (1 Corinthians 15:24). It makes the prayer end as well as begin with the vision of God in heaven, in the majesty of his name and kingdom and the perfection of his will and purpose.[95][96][97][98]

Origin

[edit]

The doxology is not included in Luke's version of the Lord's Prayer, nor is it present in the earliest manuscripts (papyrus or parchment) of Matthew,[99] representative of the Alexandrian text, although it is present in the manuscripts representative of the later Byzantine text.[100] Most scholars do not consider it part of the original text of Matthew.[101][102] The Codex Washingtonianus, which adds a doxology (in the familiar text), is of the early fifth or late fourth century.[103][104] New translations generally omit it except as a footnote.[105][106]

The Didache, generally considered a first-century text, has a doxology, "for yours is the power and the glory forever", as a conclusion for the Lord's Prayer (Didache, 8:2).[94][107][108] C. Clifton Black, although regarding the Didache as an "early second century" text, nevertheless considers the doxology it contains to be the "earliest additional ending we can trace".[107] Of a longer version,[m] Black observes: "Its earliest appearance may have been in Tatian's Diatessaron, a second-century harmony of the four Gospels".[92] The first three editions of the United Bible Societies text cited the Diatessaron for inclusion of the familiar doxology in Matthew 6:13, but in the later editions it cites the Diatessaron for excluding it.[109][specify] The Apostolic Constitutions added "the kingdom" to the beginning of the formula in the Didache, thus establishing the now familiar doxology.[110][111][112]

Varied liturgical use

[edit]

In the Byzantine Rite, whenever a priest is officiating, after the last line of the prayer he intones the doxology, "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.",[n] and in either instance, reciter(s) of the prayer reply "Amen".

Adding a doxology directly following the Our Father is not part of the liturgical tradition of the Roman Rite nor does the Latin Vulgate of St. Jerome contain the doxology that appears in late Greek manuscripts. However, it is recited since 1970 in the Roman Rite Order of Mass, not as part of the Lord's Prayer but separately as a response acclamation after the embolism developing the seventh petition in the perspective of the Final Coming of Christ.

In most Anglican editions of the Book of Common Prayer, the Lord's Prayer ends with the doxology unless it is preceded by the Kyrie eleison. This happens at the daily offices of Morning Prayer (Mattins) and Evening Prayer (Evensong) and in a few other offices.[o]

The vast majority of Protestant churches conclude the Lord's Prayer with the doxology.

Use as a language comparison tool

[edit]
Detail of the Europa Polyglotta published with Synopsis Universae Philologiae in 1741; the map gives the first phrase of the Lord's Prayer in 33 different languages of Europe

In the course of Christianization, one of the first texts to be translated between many languages has historically been the Lord's Prayer, long before the full Bible would be translated into the respective languages. Since the 16th century, collections of translations of the prayer have often been used for a quick comparison of languages. The first such collection, with 22 versions, was Mithridates, de differentiis linguarum by Conrad Gessner (1555; the title refers to Mithridates VI of Pontus who according to Pliny the Elder was an exceptional polyglot).

Gessner's idea of collecting translations of the prayer was taken up by authors of the 17th century, including Hieronymus Megiserus (1603) and Georg Pistorius (1621). Andreas Müller (Orientalist) in 1680 published an enlarged collection of 82 versions of the prayer, under the pseudonym 'Thomas Ludekenius'[113][114], of which three were in fictional philosophical languages. In 1700, Müller's collection was re-edited by B. Mottus as Oratio dominica plus centum linguis versionibus aut characteribus reddita et expressa. This edition was comparatively inferior, but a second, revised edition was published in 1715 by John Chamberlayne. This 1715 edition was used by Gottfried Hensel in his Synopsis Universae Philologiae (1741) to compile "geographico-polyglot maps" where the beginning of the prayer was shown in the geographical area where the respective languages were spoken. Johann Ulrich Kraus also published a collection with more than 100 entries.[115]

These collections continued to be improved and expanded well into the 19th century; Johann Christoph Adelung and Johann Severin Vater in 1806–1817 published the prayer in "well-nigh five hundred languages and dialects".[116]

Samples of scripture, including the Lord's Prayer, were published in 52 Asian languages, most of them not previously found in such collections, translated by the brethren of the Serampore Mission and printed at the mission press there in 1818.[citation needed]

Catholic Indulgences

[edit]

During the 2020–2021 jubilee of Saint Joseph, Pope Francis signed a decree that granted the plenary indulgence to those who shall contemplate the Lord's Prayer for at least 30 minutes.[117]

Comparisons with other prayer traditions

[edit]

The book The Comprehensive New Testament, by T. E. Clontz and J. Clontz, points to similarities between elements of the Lord's Prayer and expressions in writings of other religions as diverse as the Dhammapada, the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Golden Verses, and the Egyptian Book of the Dead.[118][page needed] It mentions in particular parallels in 1 Chronicles 29:10-18.[119][120]

Rabbi Aron Mendes Chumaceiro says that nearly all the elements of the prayer have counterparts in the Jewish Bible and Deuterocanonical books: the first part in Isaiah 63:15-16 ("Look down from heaven and see, from your holy and beautiful habitation... for you are our Father")[121] and Ezekiel 36:23 ("I will vindicate the holiness of my great name...")[122] and 38:23 ("I will show my greatness and my holiness and make myself known in the eyes of many nations..."),[123] the second part in Obadiah 1:21 ("Saviours shall go up to Mount Zion to rule Mount Esau, and the kingdom shall be the LORD's")[124] and 1 Samuel 38:18 ("...It is the LORD. Let him do what seems good to him."),[125] the third part in Proverbs 30:8 ("...feed me with my apportioned bread..."),[126] and the fourth part in Book of Sirach 28:2 ("Forgive your neighbour the wrong he has done, and then your sins will be pardoned when you pray.").[127] "Deliver us from evil" can be compared with Psalm 119:133 ("...let no iniquity get dominion over me.").[128][129]

Chumaceiro says that, because the idea of God leading a human into temptation contradicts the righteousness and love of God, "Lead us not into temptation" has no counterpart in the Jewish Bible/Christian Old Testament. However, the word "πειρασμός", which is translated as "temptation", can also be translated as "test" or "trial", making evident the attitude of someone's heart, and in the Old Testament God tested Abraham,[130] and told David, "Go, number Israel and Judah," an action that David later acknowledged as sin;[131] and the testing of Job in the Book of Job.

Reuben Bredenhof says that the various petitions of the Lord's Prayer, as well as the doxology attached to it, have a conceptual and thematic background in the Old Testament Book of Psalms.[132]

On the other hand, Andrew Wommack says that the Lord's Prayer "technically speaking... isn't even a true New Testament prayer". The only evidence or argument he offers readers, however, is to "notice that it's not prayed in the name of Jesus."[133]

In post-biblical Jewish prayer, especially Kiddushin 81a (Babylonian).[134] "Our Father which art in heaven" (אבינו שבשמים, Avinu shebashamayim) is the beginning of many Hebrew prayers.[135] "Our Father who art in heaven" and "hallowed be thy name" are reflected in the Kaddish (where it says: "May His great name be hallowed in the world which He created, according to His will, and may He establish His Kingdom...)".[136] "Lead us not into sin" is echoed in the "morning blessings" of Jewish prayer. A blessing said by some Jewish communities after the evening Shema includes a phrase quite similar to the opening of the Lord's Prayer: "Our God in heaven, hallow thy name, and establish thy kingdom forever, and rule over us for ever and ever. Amen." None of these liturgical prayers, however, can be dated to before Jesus Christ.[137][138]

Musical settings

[edit]

Various composers have incorporated the Lord's Prayer into a musical setting for utilization during liturgical services for a variety of religious traditions as well as interfaith ceremonies. Included among them are:

[edit]

As with other prayers, the Lord's Prayer was used by cooks to time their recipes before the spread of clocks. For example, a step could be "simmer the broth for three Lord's Prayers".[153]

American songwriter and arranger Brian Wilson set the text of the Lord's Prayer to an elaborate close-harmony arrangement loosely based on Malotte's melody. Wilson's group, The Beach Boys, would return to the piece several times throughout their recording career, most notably as the B-side to their 1964 single "Little Saint Nick."[154] The band Yazoo used the prayer interspersed with the lyrics of "In My Room" on the album Upstairs at Eric's.[155]

In the 2002 film Spider-Man, Norman Osborn, as the Green Goblin, attacks and injures Aunt May while she is in the middle of saying the Lord's Prayer, causing her hospitalization.

Beat Generation poet Lawrence Ferlinghetti wrote and performed a "Loud Prayer" parodying the Lord's Prayer, one version of which was featured in the 1978 film The Last Waltz.[156]

In July 2023, Filipino drag queen and former Drag Den contestant Pura Luka Vega drew controversy online for posting a video of themselves dressing up as Jesus Christ and dancing to a punk rock version of Ama Namin, the Filipino version of the Lord's Prayer. The video was also condemned by several Philippine politicians and the Catholic Bishops' Conference of the Philippines.[157]

Images

[edit]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Lord's Prayer

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Lord's Prayer, also called the Our Father or Pater Noster, is a foundational taught by to his disciples as a model for communal , appearing in the Gospels of :9–13) and Luke (11:2–4). The Matthean version, embedded in the , is longer and includes petitions for 's name to be hallowed, kingdom to come, daily , forgiveness of debts as debts are forgiven, and deliverance from temptation and evil; Luke's parallel is more concise, omitting some phrases while retaining core elements like addressing as and seeking daily provision and pardon. Textual analysis reveals variants between the accounts, with scholars positing that Luke's form may reflect an earlier, simpler tradition, while Matthew expands for liturgical or didactic purposes, though both derive from ' oral instruction. Central to Christian worship from antiquity, the prayer is prescribed for thrice-daily recitation in the Didache, a first- or second-century manual of church practice, attesting its rapid integration into early communal rites without the later-added doxology "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen." found in some manuscripts and traditions. This concluding doxology, absent from the oldest Greek codices of Matthew like Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, likely entered via liturgical usage, as evidenced by its presence in the Didache and subsequent expansions, highlighting how manuscript transmission blended scriptural and oral elements. Across denominations, it structures petitions hierarchically—first glorifying God, then seeking earthly needs—emphasizing dependence on divine sovereignty amid human frailty, and remains among the most memorized and recited texts in Christian history, recited in liturgies worldwide. Debates persist over phrasing like "lead us not into temptation," interpreted causally as requesting divine guidance away from trials rather than implying God tempts, underscoring the prayer's role in fostering theological realism about providence and moral agency.

Biblical Origins and Sources

Sources in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke

The Gospel of Matthew records the Lord's Prayer in chapter 6, verses 9–13, embedding it within the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7), a extended discourse where Jesus outlines ethical teachings for his disciples. This placement follows Jesus' warnings against performative prayer by religious hypocrites, positioning the prayer as a concise model emphasizing private devotion and dependence on God. The Matthean version features seven petitions, including the distinctive Greek term epiousios in the request for "daily bread," a hapax legomenon whose precise meaning—possibly "for the coming day" or "necessary for existence"—remains debated among philologists but underscores subsistence needs. In contrast, the Gospel of Luke presents a briefer form of the in 11:2–4, triggered by a disciple's request to teach in the manner of John the Baptist's instruction to his followers. Luke's account omits expansions like "your will be done on as it is in heaven" and condenses petitions, such as merging clauses into a single request, resulting in four or five lines depending on textual variants. These differences suggest editorial adaptations by the evangelists rather than divergent oral recitations, with Luke's potentially preserving a more primitive structure less influenced by liturgical expansion. Scholarly consensus dates the composition of Matthew to approximately 80–90 CE and Luke to 80–90 CE, both postdating the Gospel of Mark and drawing on shared traditions possibly from a hypothetical —a collection of ' sayings—or parallel oral transmissions from Aramaic-speaking communities. The prayer's attestation across these , independent in composition yet overlapping in content, provides empirical textual evidence for its rootedness in first-century Christian teaching, predating the written gospels by decades and aligning with ' reported emphasis on kingdom-oriented . Early manuscript consistency in core phrasing, despite minor variants, further bolsters the reliability of this dual sourcing over later harmonizations.

Historical and Cultural Context of Composition

The Lord's Prayer originated from teachings delivered by Jesus of Nazareth during his ministry in Galilee around 30 AD, a time when Judea and Galilee fell under Roman administration following Pompey's conquest in 63 BC. This era was marked by diverse Jewish sects, including Pharisees who emphasized ritual purity, oral traditions, and structured synagogue prayers amid widespread apocalyptic hopes for God's kingdom amid foreign domination. Jesus' instruction on prayer responded to these dynamics, promoting communal yet intimate address to God as "Father," a motif present but not dominant in Jewish piety. The prayer's structure draws from established Jewish liturgical forms, exhibiting parallels with the , an recited in that invokes the sanctification of God's name and the coming of His kingdom "in your lifetime and in your days." Similar petitions appear in the Eighteen Benedictions (), a core of emphasizing divine sovereignty, provision, forgiveness, and deliverance from evil. These elements reflect causal links to synagogue practices where blessings framed communal worship, adapting traditional berakhot for brevity and focus on eschatological fulfillment. In :5-8, critiques ostentatious by "hypocrites" who perform in synagogues and streets for acclaim—practices attributed to some Pharisaic displays—and "pagan" repetitions deemed ineffective, advocating instead concise, heartfelt petitions known already to . This emphasis on simplicity counters perceived excesses in both Jewish ritualism and incantations, aligning with rabbinic-era warnings against vain repetitions while prioritizing faith over formula. Artifacts from the Dead Sea Scrolls, composed by the Qumran community circa 150 BC to 68 AD, provide empirical parallels in hymn-like texts such as the Hodayot, featuring structured pleas for daily sustenance, moral cleansing, and triumph over enemies, mirroring the Lord's Prayer's petitions within a sectarian Jewish framework of communal supplication.

Debates on Oral Tradition and Authenticity

Scholars debate the authenticity of the Lord's Prayer as a direct teaching of Jesus, weighing evidence from its attestation in the Synoptic Gospels against theories of communal evolution during oral transmission. Proponents of authenticity emphasize its multiple attestation in Matthew 6:9–13 and Luke 11:2–4, which derive from independent traditions—likely a shared Aramaic source or early oral material predating the written Gospels composed around 70–90 CE—supporting its origin in Jesus' ministry circa 30 CE. This dual preservation aligns with criteria for historical reliability in Gospel studies, as the prayer's core petitions exhibit consistency despite contextual differences, suggesting a stable kernel transmitted faithfully by eyewitnesses or their immediate successors. The prayer's content further bolsters claims of authenticity by embodying ' recorded critiques of formalistic piety, such as his condemnation of hypocritical public prayers and vain repetitions in :5–8, where he advocates sincere, private communion with over ritualistic display. Its concise structure—seven petitions focused on divine sovereignty and human dependence—mirrors first-century Jewish prayer patterns like the while innovating toward eschatological urgency, consistent with ' apocalyptic emphasis on 's kingdom, without evident Hellenistic accretions that might indicate later church shaping. Skeptical perspectives, rooted in form criticism pioneered by Rudolf Bultmann in the early 20th century, posit that the prayer may reflect post-resurrection communal needs rather than ipsissima verba Jesu, arguing that oral traditions were molded by early Christian liturgy to address forgiveness and daily provision amid persecution. Bultmann and followers like those in the Jesus Seminar viewed Synoptic sayings as products of Sitz im Leben der Gemeinde (church life setting), potentially expanding a simpler original into a formulaic prayer after Jesus' death, with variations between Matthew and Luke evidencing redactional growth. However, such views presuppose extensive oral fluidity without direct evidence, often critiqued for underestimating mnemonic techniques in oral cultures and over-relying on 20th-century analogies of mythologized evolution. Empirical evidence counters heavy redaction claims through early extracanonical attestation, notably the (ca. 50–100 CE), which quotes the Matthean form minus the and prescribes its thrice-daily recitation, indicating a fixed, authoritative text within decades of the apostles. This proximity to the events—spanning roughly 20–70 years—favors causal preservation via direct apostolic chains over transformative communal invention, as the prayer's brevity (under 70 words in Greek) and rhythmic parallelism enhanced memorability in an oral milieu, minimizing distortion akin to stable transmission of rabbinic blessings. While form-critical skepticism persists in some academic circles, influenced by mid-20th-century existentialist , the majority of contemporary scholars affirm the prayer's substantial authenticity from , grounded in its unembellished alignment with his ethical and kingdom-focused ethos.

Textual Variants and Early Manuscripts

Greek Original and Key Manuscripts

The Greek text of the Lord's Prayer, as preserved in the Gospel of Matthew (6:9–13), forms the basis for the reconstructed original in critical editions such as the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (28th edition). This version reads:
Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς·
ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου.
ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου·
γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου,
ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς.
Τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·
καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν,
ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν·
καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν,
ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ.
The shorter parallel in Luke 11:2–4 exhibits similar phrasing but omits elements like the petition for daily bread and forgiveness of debts. Critical reconstructions prioritize early witnesses, yielding a stable core text despite minor orthographic and syntactical variances, such as the presence or absence of movable nu (ν) in verbs like ἀφήκαμεν. Key early manuscripts include Codex Sinaiticus (ℵ, 4th century, ca. 330–360 CE) and Codex Vaticanus (B, 4th century, ca. 325–350 CE), both Alexandrian-text-type uncials that preserve the Matthaean form without the later doxology ("For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen"). These codices show high agreement, with differences limited to spelling (e.g., ιουσαις vs. ουσιαις in some contexts) and minor expansions in Sinaiticus corrected by later hands to align with Matthew from Luke's version. Other significant witnesses, such as Codex Alexandrinus (A, 5th century), introduce slight harmonizations, but the prayer's structure remains consistent across papyri like 𝔓64 (ca. 200 CE, fragmentary) and uncials. A notable philological is ἐπιούσιον in :11, a appearing only here and in Luke 11:3, describing "our bread." Traditional renderings as "daily" derive from ancient interpretations but face scholarly skepticism due to the term's absence elsewhere in ; proposed etymologies include ἐπί + οὐσία ("supersubstantial" or "for essential ," emphasizing spiritual sustenance) or ἐπί + ἰοῦσα ("for the coming day," implying future provision). Empirical analysis favors non-literal meanings over "daily," as no pre-Christian parallels support the latter without Semitic influence assumptions. Among approximately 5,800 extant Greek New Testament manuscripts, the Lord's Prayer appears in over 90%, predominantly in Matthew, with textual stability evidenced by agreement on core petitions in 98% of cases; principal variants involve the (absent in earliest witnesses, added by in Byzantine traditions) and / phrasing (ὀφειλήματα vs. ἁμαρτίας in some later copies). This transmission reflects rigorous scribal fidelity, with deviations traceable to liturgical expansion rather than doctrinal alteration.

Aramaic and Syriac Influences

The Lord's Prayer, as recorded in the Greek Gospels of Matthew and Luke, exhibits Semitic influences consistent with an underlying the Greek composition, though direct evidence for an original remains absent. Scholars identify rhythmic structures and parallelisms in the prayer that echo poetic forms, suggesting from Jesus' vernacular into by the Gospel authors. For instance, the antithetical phrasing in petitions like ", Thy will be done" mirrors Semitic parallelism found in Hebrew and prayers. However, empirical data from early papyri, such as (ca. 175–225 CE), preserve the text solely in Greek, supporting Greek as the language of final composition rather than a secondary from . Hypothetical reconstructions of an version, such as "Abun dbashmayo nethqaddash shmakh" for the opening ("Our Father in heaven, hallowed be thy name"), derive primarily from back-translations of the Greek or the Syriac rather than independent sources. These efforts, while illuminating potential oral forms, often incorporate interpretive elements from later traditions and lack verification through pre-Christian or first-century manuscripts of the prayer. primacy advocates, like in his 20th-century translations, claim the reflects an original , but this view is rejected by mainstream scholarship, which traces the 's portions to Greek Vorlagen based on linguistic and textual comparisons. The Syriac Peshitta, an early translation of the Bible into Syriac (a dialect of ) with its completed by the 5th century CE, provides a key witness to Eastern Christian renderings of the prayer. It features phrases like "hab lan lachma d'sunqanan yaomana" for "give us our daily ," preserving a Semitic idiom for sustenance that aligns closely with the Greek epiousios but emphasizes ongoing need (sunqanan, "for our necessity"). This version influenced Syriac-speaking churches, such as the , where it shaped liturgical use from onward. Despite its value for tracing transmission, the Peshitta's divergences from Greek manuscripts, such as minor word orders, stem from translation choices rather than an independent Aramaic archetype, underscoring Greek textual primacy. Debates over retro-translation persist, with some proposing roots for opaque Greek terms like epiousios, possibly deriving from concepts of "essential" or "tomorrow's" bread, but these remain speculative without corroborating epigraphic evidence. Overemphasis on primacy risks undervaluing the Greek manuscripts' antiquity and coherence, as no fragments predate the Greek ones by centuries. Syriac versions, while retaining flavor, affirm the prayer's adaptability across linguistic traditions without supplanting the empirical Greek base.

Relationship Between Matthaean and Lucan Versions

The versions of the Lord's Prayer appear in Matthew 6:9–13 and Luke 11:2–4, with Matthew presenting a longer form that includes additional phrases absent in Luke, such as the elaboration "who art ," the petition "thy will be done on earth as it is ," the request to "deliver us from evil," and a concluding ("for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen"), though the is widely regarded as a later liturgical addition not original to text. Luke's rendition is notably shorter, employing "Father" without the heavenly qualifier, omitting the will and deliverance clause entirely, substituting "sins" for "debts" (and "those indebted to us" for "our debtors"), and using "day by day" instead of "this day" for daily bread. Source-critical analysis attributes these divergences to the two evangelists' independent redaction of a shared antecedent , most commonly identified as the hypothetical Q document—a collection of ' sayings presumed to underlie non-Markan material common to both Gospels, dated by scholars to the 40s or 50s CE based on its formative stratum and lack of references to events post-70 CE. The overlapping petitions (hallowing God's name, , daily bread, , and avoidance of ) exhibit substantial verbal parallelism in Greek, supporting derivation from a common written or oral source rather than direct literary dependence between Matthew and Luke. Luke's brevity is often explained as fidelity to a simpler proto-form suited to a broader, Gentile-leaning audience, while Matthew's expansions, including the "thy will be done" insertion, align with the Gospel's emphases on fuller eschatological and covenantal themes resonant with Jewish scriptural echoes (e.g., parallels to 1 Chronicles 29:11 in the ). This reconstruction via the (Mark plus ) accounts for the prayers' placement: Matthew integrates it into the as a model amid ethical instruction, whereas Luke positions it as a disciple-requested following ' solitary prayer, reflecting distinct narrative agendas without implying multiple original utterances by . Alternative views, such as Luke abbreviating Matthew or independent oral traditions, face challenges from the precise wording matches in -reconstructed pericopes, though the itself remains hypothetical and debated among some scholars favoring oral transmission models.

Early Translations and Liturgical Forms

Latin Vulgate and Western Traditions

The Latin translation of the Lord's Prayer, rendered by Sophronius (St. ) between 382 and 405 AD, established the standard form for for over a millennium. , commissioned by , produced this version from Greek and Hebrew sources, aiming for fidelity to the originals while rendering the text accessible in the emerging of the . The 's Matthaean version reads: "Pater noster, qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum; adveniat regnum tuum; fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo et in terra; panem nostrum supersubstantialem da nobis hodie; et dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris; et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo." This translation's phrasing, particularly "debita nostra" (our debts) for the Greek opheilēmata in the forgiveness petition, emphasized moral indebtedness over transgression, influencing Western liturgical interpretations of sin as an obligation owed to God. Jerome's choice of "supersubstantialem" for the enigmatic Greek epiousios in the bread petition has drawn scholarly note as a literal rendering implying "super-essential" or Eucharistic sustenance, diverging from earlier "quotidianum" (daily) but preserving doctrinal focus on divine provision without altering core petitions. Despite minor variances from Greek precedents—such as the absence of a concluding in Jerome's base text—the maintained causal consistency in teachings on divine sovereignty and human , avoiding substantive shifts in petitionary intent. Over 8,000 survive, attesting to its widespread transmission through Carolingian scriptoria and medieval monasteries, where it supplanted pre-existing versions by the 8th century. This textual stability facilitated its integration into monastic offices, such as the Rule of St. Benedict (c. 530 AD), mandating thrice-daily , thereby embedding the prayer in Western liturgical rhythm and shaping communal devotion across . The form remained authoritative until the Sixto-Clementine edition of 1592, promulgated by , which reaffirmed the Vulgate's text amid critiques while standardizing for printed Bibles. Empirical of manuscripts, as in 19th-century Benedictine editions, confirms high fidelity, with variants chiefly orthographic rather than interpretive, underscoring the translation's role in doctrinal continuity despite isolated scribal errors.

Eastern Syriac and Byzantine Forms

In the Byzantine Rite, the Lord's Prayer adheres closely to the Matthean form from the Greek New Testament, integrated into the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, composed around 400 AD and standardized by the 5th century. This liturgy recites the prayer aloud by the priest before the distribution of Holy Communion, with the congregation responding "Amen" at its conclusion, emphasizing communal participation in the Eucharistic context. The Byzantine tradition appends a doxology immediately after the petitions—"For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever and unto ages of ages"—an expansion attested in eastern liturgical practices from the 4th century onward, distinguishing it from Western usages by incorporating Trinitarian language. This form appears in early Byzantine manuscripts and reflects a scribal and oral tradition where the doxology, drawn from 1 Chronicles 29:11-13, was added during recitation to affirm divine sovereignty. Eastern Syriac traditions, associated with the , employ the Syriac version of the , dating to the , which renders the prayer in dialect with phrasing such as "Our Father who art in the heavens; Hallowed be thy name" and concludes the final petition as "but deliver us from the evil one," personifying the adversary in line with Semitic interpretive conventions. Liturgical manuscripts from this era, including codices, exhibit minimal textual alterations over centuries, fostering doctrinal consistency across Eastern Syriac communities amid regional persecutions and schisms. Syriac Orthodox usage, while Western Syriac in rite, shares the base and integrates the into the of St. James with similar stability, where 5th-century texts like the Rabbula Gospels preserve the form against later interpolations seen elsewhere. This continuity underscores the prayer's role in maintaining orthodox and in Eastern traditions, with empirical evidence from surviving palimpsests and lectionaries showing fidelity to the core petitions despite phonetic evolutions in Syriac pronunciation.

Pre-Reformation Variations

In medieval , the Lord's Prayer, recited as the Pater Noster in Latin, exhibited variations primarily in liturgical context and rubrics rather than in the core text, which adhered to the rendering across regional rites such as and Celtic traditions. The , prominent in through the 8th century, positioned the prayer near the conclusion of the Eucharistic , often following the fraction rite and accompanied by variable introductory collects that emphasized communal . These adaptations allowed for brevity in some local practices, occasionally streamlining petitions during private or abbreviated devotions, though full recitation remained normative in formal services. The Carolingian reforms of the 8th and 9th centuries, initiated under , advanced standardization of the prayer's use empire-wide to promote doctrinal unity and clerical uniformity. Charlemagne emphasized its memorization and recitation alongside the , mandating instruction to and to counteract regional divergences and support liturgical cohesion in Frankish territories. This effort involved the dissemination of corrected sacramentaries and homiliaries, ensuring consistent textual and melodic forms in monastic and parish settings. By the , devotional recitation of the Pater Noster attracted papal indulgences, with grants offering remission of temporal penalties—such as 40 days' penance—for frequent repetition, fostering widespread lay piety and integration into penitential practices. In pre-Reformation , the prayer was typically chanted, enhancing its ritual solemnity in both monastic hours and across emergent diocesan uses aligned with Roman curial models. These developments preserved textual fidelity while accommodating regional emphases until the eve of the 16th-century reforms.

Modern Translations and Denominational Adaptations

English Versions and Ecumenical Efforts

The first post-Reformation English translation of the Lord's Prayer appeared in William Tyndale's 1526 New Testament, rendering the fifth petition as "And forgeve vs oure treaspases even as we forgeve oure trespacers," introducing "trespasses" to emphasize moral and relational infractions over literal debt. The 1611 King James Version reverted to "And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors," directly reflecting the Greek opheilēmata (debts or obligations) in Matthew 6:12 and underscoring a covenantal sense of owed righteousness to God. Subsequent Anglican tradition solidified "trespasses" in the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, stating "And forgive us our trespasses, As we forgive them that trespass against us," which influenced widespread liturgical recitation in English-speaking churches and highlighted interpersonal violations alongside divine pardon. In the 20th century, ecumenical initiatives sought unified English texts for interdenominational worship; the English Language Liturgical Consultation (ELLC), formed in 1980 by liturgists from Anglican, Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, and other traditions, released a version: "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us," prioritizing contemporary accessibility while retaining core petitions. This text gained adoption in services across denominations, including the and some Catholic missals, to foster shared prayer amid doctrinal diversity. Critics of such modernizations, including some evangelical scholars, contend that substituting "sins" for "debts" or "trespasses" broadens the term to generic wrongdoing, potentially attenuating the prayer's emphasis on personal moral indebtedness and reciprocal as a strict ethical imperative. These efforts reflect broader trends in translation toward inclusive phrasing, yet traditional renderings persist in conservative liturgies to preserve textual fidelity to the Matthean original.

Protestant Reforms and King James Influence

Martin Luther's translation of the into German, published in 1522, rendered the Lord's Prayer in vernacular form drawn directly from the Greek text, emphasizing accessibility for lay believers in line with principles that prioritized scriptural authority over ecclesiastical tradition. This version retained the —"For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever"—based on the Greek manuscripts available, such as those in the Erasmian editions, while Luther critiqued Catholic practices of rote recitation without understanding, advocating instead for prayer as an expression of faith and personal engagement with Scripture. In his Small Catechism of 1529, Luther expounded each petition to foster doctrinal comprehension, rejecting associations of prayer with indulgences or merit-based efficacy in favor of its role as a guide for sincere supplication rooted in justification by faith alone. John Calvin further advanced Reformation views by interpreting the Lord's Prayer as a template for covenantal communion with God, underscoring the need for heartfelt reverence, self-examination, and alignment with divine will over mechanical or superstitious repetition. In his (1536 onward) and commentaries on the Gospels, Calvin described prayer as "intimate conversation" that reflects dependence on God's providence, critiquing medieval accretions like prescribed formulas detached from biblical fidelity and promoting its use in Reformed as a means of spiritual discipline without reliance on priestly mediation or extra-scriptural rituals. This approach reinforced the reformers' commitment to stripping away non-biblical elements, restoring the prayer's simplicity as a direct appeal grounded in texts of Matthew 6:9–13 and Luke 11:2–4. The King James Version (KJV) of the , authorized in 1611 under King James I of , solidified Protestant textual standards by incorporating the Lord's Prayer from the Greek tradition, including the in :13, which shaped English-speaking , catechisms, and personal devotion for centuries. Its widespread adoption—evident in over 80% of English Bibles printed in the —promoted uniformity and fidelity to the majority Byzantine manuscript tradition, treating the doxology as optional for recitation but integral to scriptural completeness, thereby influencing global Protestantism's emphasis on unadorned, Bible-centered prayer free from perceived Catholic elaborations. These reforms collectively prioritized empirical adherence to available scriptural sources, fostering a devotional practice centered on doctrinal purity rather than institutional traditions.

Catholic and Orthodox Contemporary Usage

In the Roman Catholic Church's Novus Ordo , promulgated in 1969 following the Second Vatican , the Lord's Prayer retains the Matthean phrasing "and lead us not into , but deliver us from evil" in official liturgical translations, including English versions approved by episcopal conferences. This wording emphasizes human vulnerability and divine protection, aligning with longstanding Western tradition. In 2017, proposed revising the sixth petition to "do not let us fall into temptation" to clarify that does not actively induce sin, arguing the original could mislead the faithful. While the Italian adopted a similar change in its 2019 ("non ci lasciare cadere in tentazione"), the universal Latin text and most international versions, including English, have preserved the traditional rendering without formal alteration. Eastern Orthodox Churches continue to recite the Lord's Prayer in its ancient Byzantine form during the of St. John Chrysostom and other services, typically in Greek, , or vernacular equivalents faithful to the original. This usage incorporates the full —"For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the , now and ever, and unto ages of ages"—as an integral conclusion, reflecting early Eastern liturgical practice without substantive modifications since the patristic era. Orthodox faithful emphasize its communal recitation in , often chanted melodically, underscoring continuity with pre-schism traditions. Empirical data from a 2021 survey of U.S. Catholics indicate that 51% engage in daily , with the Lord's Prayer forming a core element of personal and liturgical devotion, though weekly attendance—where it is prominently featured—stands at approximately 28-31%. In Catholicism, pious recitation of the Lord's Prayer, when joined with other conditions like detachment from sin, can facilitate partial indulgences as outlined in the Enchiridion Indulgentiarum (1999 edition), promoting its role in sacramental preparation and everyday spirituality. Orthodox usage similarly integrates it into monastic and lay routines, such as the Jesus Prayer cycle, fostering habitual invocation amid unchanging rite stability.

Theological Exegesis

Overall Structure and First-Principles Interpretation

The Lord's Prayer, as presented in of :9-13), opens with an invocation addressing God as "Our Father in heaven" and proceeds through seven petitions that form its core structure. The initial three petitions concern divine priorities: sanctification of God's name, advent of his kingdom, and fulfillment of his will on earth as in heaven. These are followed by four petitions oriented toward human conditions: provision of daily bread, forgiveness of sins (conditioned on forgiving others), avoidance of , and from . This bipartite arrangement—three God-centered followed by four human-centered—reflects the prayer's recorded form in early Christian texts, distinguishing it from more fluid or individualistic supplications. From a foundational analytical perspective, the prayer's enforces a hierarchical logic, wherein petitions for transcendent realities precede those for temporal needs, implying that welfare causally depends on to divine order rather than autonomous claims. This theocentric sequencing counters self-referential prayer patterns by subordinating immediate wants to eternal verities, as evidenced in the absence of appeals for personal , , or vengeance—foci common in extrabiblical devotional literature. The structure thus models as an act of rational alignment with observed cosmic and moral contingencies, where God's functions as for sustenance and redemption. The prayer's exclusively plural phrasing ("our," "us") further embeds it in communal rather than solitary contexts, underscoring collective eschatological hope—anticipating kingdom consummation and evil's defeat—over parochial urgencies. This orientation aligns with empirical patterns in ancient Near Eastern covenantal rites, where group fidelity to higher authority precedes material pleas, promoting realism about human interdependence and deferred fulfillment in a fallen order.

Petitions on God's Kingdom, Will, and Provision

The opening petitions of the Lord's Prayer prioritize God's glory and , establishing a theocentric framework before addressing human needs, as evidenced by the sequential structure in Matthew 6:9-11. This arrangement reflects a deliberate theological order, where reverence for the divine precedes pleas for personal provision, countering interpretations that equate the with egalitarian social priorities. The petition "hallowed be thy name" seeks the active sanctification and reverence of 's character, derived from hagiasthētō to onoma sou, meaning to treat 's name—representing His essence and reputation—as holy and set apart. It echoes precedents, particularly 36:23, where promises to vindicate His profaned name among the nations through restorative acts, not effort alone. Exegetes interpret this as a call for believers to align actions with divine holiness, enabling to manifest His purity amid unrighteousness, rather than a mere declarative . "Thy " invokes the eschatological arrival of God's sovereign rule, urging its full realization on in conformity with heavenly order, as articulated in the Greek elthetō hē basileia sou. This anticipates a future divine intervention resolving physical and spiritual ailments, distinct from postmillennial or views that recast it as incremental human-driven progress toward utopian equity. The aligns with prophetic imagery of God's kingdom supplanting earthly powers, as in Daniel 2:44, emphasizing apocalyptic consummation over present socio-political reforms. The subsequent "thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" demands submission to God's decretive and preceptive will, paralleling Christ's prayer in Gethsemane (Matthew 26:42), where personal desires yield to divine purpose. It petitions for increased righteousness and repentance globally, fostering obedience that mirrors heavenly perfection, without implying passive resignation but active alignment with revealed commands. This underscores causal priority: human flourishing depends on conformity to God's unchanging standards, not autonomous will. "Give us this day our daily " requests literal subsistence for the present day, rooted in the rare Greek term epiousios (translated "daily" but connoting essential or impending need), evoking the miracle of Exodus 16, where provided exact portions daily to instill dependence and prevent hoarding. In the wilderness narrative dated circa 1446 BCE by biblical chronology, ceased on entry to (Joshua 5:12), reinforcing transient reliance on divine supply rather than stored wealth or systemic entitlements. Analogies to modern welfare expansions dilute this, as the original context critiques self-sufficiency and excess, promoting disciplined trust in 's timed provision over indefinite institutional support.

Petitions on Forgiveness, Temptation, and Deliverance

The petition "forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors" employs the Greek term opheilēmata, denoting literal financial obligations but figuratively extended to moral and spiritual debts arising from , underscoring human as a binding liability to divine rather than incidental faults. This formulation reflects first-century Jewish conceptualizations of as unpaid , demanding restitution through and ethical reciprocity. The conditional structure—"as we also have forgiven"—establishes reciprocity as causal: divine remission hinges on the petitioner's prior extension of mercy, evidenced in the ensuing verses where Jesus explicates that unforgiveness bars heavenly pardon, emphasizing agency in moral restoration over passive . Early patristic reinforces this realism of sin as accrued obligation requiring daily confession and interpersonal . , writing circa 200 AD in De Oratione, interprets the plea as an admission of ongoing guilt, analogizing it to the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matthew 18:23–35), where failure to forgive peers nullifies one's own discharge from to the king, thus portraying not as therapeutic release but as covenantal conditionality predicated on imitative justice. This view aligns with broader ante-Nicene consensus, where figures like and affirm that the prayer's daily rhythm acknowledges persistent human frailty, rendering pardon contingent upon active emulation of God's mercy toward offenders, without which sin's causal chains—rooted in willful transgression—persist unchecked. The subsequent request, "and lead us not into temptation," invokes divine sovereignty over trials (peirasmos), distinguishing providential testing from inducement to sin, as James 1:13 clarifies that God tempts no one, yet permits ordeals to refine fidelity, akin to Abraham's commanded sacrifice of (Genesis 22:1) or Job's afflictions, where endurance proves allegiance amid existential peril. Patristic interpreters, including (circa 185–254 AD), frame this as entreaty against succumbing to trials orchestrated by adversarial forces, not a of God's in calibrated adversity but a for preservation from overwhelming to , grounding in the causal reality that human weakness, absent divine restraint, yields to innate propensities under duress. Finally, "but deliver us from " targets ho ponēros—the evil one—personifying as principal antagonist in a cosmic contest, per first-century apocalyptic where demonic agency precipitates moral downfall, as echoed in Ephesians 6:12's warfare against principalities. Early Greek fathers predominantly rendered this as rescue from the personal adversary, not abstract malevolence, with and others viewing it as petition for eschatological victory over the devil's accusatory , affirming causal realism wherein unmitigated manifests through intelligent opposition rather than impersonal . This culminates the prayer's anthropocentric turn, beseeching extraction from sin's orbit—from debt's accrual, trial's lure, to malign entrapment—without diluting human sinfulness as mere psychological distress.

Doxology: Content, Origins, and Inclusion Debates

The doxology appended to the Lord's Prayer, typically rendered as "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever [or forever and ever]. Amen," constitutes a brief ascription of attributing , might, and splendor to eternally. This formula echoes Trinitarian themes through its emphasis on divine attributes but lacks explicit reference to the persons of the . Its origins trace to early Christian liturgical practice rather than the original Gospel composition, with the earliest attestation appearing in the , a church manual dated to approximately 100 AD, which concludes the prayer with "For thine is forever." The phrasing draws direct inspiration from 1 Chronicles 29:11, where King David declares, "Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and , and the victory, and the majesty," in a context of temple offerings and praise for God's eternal dominion. This parallel underscores a tradition of concluding petitions with doxological affirmations, adapted into Christian usage by the second century as a standardized liturgical close. Manuscript evidence reveals the 's absence from the earliest Greek witnesses to Matthew 6:13, including fourth-century uncials such as and , as well as most versions of Luke 11:4, indicating it was not part of the autograph text of either . It emerges consistently in later Byzantine manuscripts (from the fifth century onward), which form the basis of the , influencing its inclusion in translations like the King James Version of 1611. Empirical analysis of textual variants favors viewing the as a secondary accretion, likely inserted by scribes familiar with oral or liturgical recitations to harmonize the prayer's abrupt ending with customs. Debates over inclusion persist along textual-critical and denominational lines, with Protestant traditions—particularly those adhering to the Byzantine textual tradition—frequently reciting the full form with in worship, as seen in Anglican, Lutheran, and Reformed liturgies. Roman Catholics, following and critical editions, omit it from the proper but append a variant ("For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours, now and forever") after the in the , preserving liturgical continuity without claiming scriptural originality. Eastern Orthodox practice integrates it directly into the , reflecting unquestioned acceptance in Byzantine textual streams and patristic commentaries. While manuscript omissions substantiate non-originality to the Matthean or Lukan reports, the 's early adoption and scriptural resonance affirm its enduring devotional efficacy in ascribing ultimate to , irrespective of textual .

Liturgical and Devotional Use

Role in Christian Worship Across Denominations

The Lord's Prayer serves as a unifying element in corporate , recited communally in liturgical services across major denominations as a model of and taught by . In Anglican traditions, it forms part of the Daily Office, appearing in both Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer within the , where it concludes the intercessory collects and precedes additional supplications, fostering a of daily communal devotion. In Roman Catholic worship, the prayer holds a central position during the , recited by and congregation immediately before the and sign of peace, emphasizing its eucharistic context without the concluding . Eastern Orthodox similarly integrates it toward the end of the anaphora, chanted by and with accompanying ektenias, underscoring communal preparation for Holy Communion; it recurs multiple times in the full cycle of daily services. Among Protestant groups, usage varies: Lutherans and Reformed churches often include it in eucharistic liturgies akin to Catholic forms but append the ("For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever"), reflecting textual traditions from the and Byzantine rites absent in Western Latin manuscripts. Evangelical and services may recite it less routinely, prioritizing spontaneous to avoid rote formalism, though it remains a frequent congregational response in many settings. This doxological inclusion highlights a point of division, with Catholics adhering to the Matthean text ending at "deliver us from evil" to preserve scriptural fidelity over early patristic expansions.

Practices of Daily Recitation and Meditation

In early Christian communities, the , a manual dated to approximately 50–120 AD, prescribed reciting the Lord's Prayer three times daily—morning, noon, and evening—as a core devotional discipline to align with divine . This practice, rooted in Jewish precedents like Daniel's thrice-daily prayers (Daniel 6:10), emphasized habitual invocation over sporadic piety, fostering causal links between regular supplication and sustained spiritual focus. Monastic traditions, such as those codified in the Rule of St. Benedict around 530 AD, integrated the Lord's Prayer into the , concluding each of the seven or eight daily offices with its recitation, thereby embedding it in a structured regimen that prioritized disciplined repetition to cultivate attentiveness to God amid communal labor and rest. Such routines aimed at habituating the mind to theological truths, countering ritualistic formalism through intentional pauses that reinforced first-principles dependence on divine provision. Reformation-era Protestants, particularly Puritans, reframed daily recitation as a tool for heartfelt engagement rather than mechanical rote, viewing the prayer as a scriptural model to inform spontaneous petitions and guard against "vain repetitions" critiqued in Matthew 6:7. Theologians like Thomas Watson (c. 1620–1686) urged meditators to unpack its petitions progressively—starting with reverence for God's name—transforming daily use into meditative exposition that builds doctrinal retention and moral alignment, prioritizing internal transformation over external form. This approach underscored causal realism: repetition without understanding yields superficiality, but paired with reflection, it disciplines the will toward obedience, as evidenced in Puritan diaries documenting personal applications for trials like persecution. Empirical data supports repetition's role in enhancing retention and cognitive during on the prayer. Studies indicate that rhythmic strengthens neural pathways for encoding scriptural content, improving long-term recall akin to techniques, while preserving attentional resources depleted by daily stressors. Psychologically, this fosters resilience by linking habitual practice to reduced , enabling deeper contemplation of petitions like , though outcomes depend on to avoid mere automatism. In contemporary settings, digital tools facilitate daily recitation and meditation, with apps like Lectio 365 guiding users through morning, midday, and evening sessions incorporating the Lord's Prayer alongside scripture reflection to build consistent habits. Platforms such as offer audio-guided meditations on its petitions, blending traditional devotion with accessibility for lay users, though integrations with secular practices risk diluting theological specificity by prioritizing experiential calm over doctrinal submission. These resources, emerging prominently in the 2010s–2020s, reflect a return to thrice-daily patterns but invite scrutiny for potential commodification, where empirical habit-tracking supplants unmediated reliance on the prayer's content for .

Sacramental Aspects and Indulgences in Catholicism

In , the Lord's Prayer holds sacramental significance as a that encapsulates the petitions of the Christian life, recited universally within the sacraments to invoke and prepare the soul for reception of grace. It is prominently featured in the during the Liturgy of the , positioned after the Great Amen and before the embolism "Deliver us, Lord," serving as a communal summary of intercessions expressed earlier in the and linking the anaphora to Communion, where the petition for "daily bread" symbolizes the itself. This placement underscores its role in fostering ecclesial unity and eschatological hope, drawing from early like , who viewed it as a "summary of the whole ." The prayer's sacramental efficacy is understood not as a sacrament proper but as a act that disposes the faithful to sacraments through humble and to Christ's will, with traditions interpreting its seven petitions as mirroring the seven —hallowing God's name evoking , the kingdom ordination, and so forth—though such correspondences are symbolic rather than dogmatic. Catholic doctrine emphasizes that its power derives from Christ's , rendering it a model for all and a when recited with , yet contingent on the pray-er's interior rather than rote performance. Regarding indulgences, the attaches partial indulgences to the devout recitation of the Lord's Prayer as part of broader pious exercises, such as church visits requiring one Our Father, one , and the , potentially elevating to plenary under post-1967 norms if accompanied by sacramental confession, Eucharistic Communion, prayers for the Pope's intentions, and full detachment from . Plenary indulgences remit all temporal punishment due to , drawing from the treasury of merits accrued by Christ and the saints, while partial indulgences remit a portion; however, these require genuine and are not mechanical, as the 1967 Indulgentiarum Doctrina shifted focus from quantified remission to spiritual renewal, eliminating prior abuses like fixed "days" off . Historically, pre-Reformation practices linked indulgences to prayers including the Pater Noster, but abuses—such as promising automatic remission for monetary contributions toward projects like without emphasizing repentance—fueled Protestant critiques, treating the treasury as a commodifiable asset rather than a conditional application of grace. The (1545–1563) affirmed indulgences' validity rooted in the but decreed reforms, mandating accurate preaching that indulgences aid satisfaction for without implying purchase of and prohibiting associated trafficking to curb exploitation. From a causal perspective, while Church teaching posits divine remission through applied merits, empirical verification of temporal punishment's reduction remains inherently unverifiable, prioritizing personal repentance as the of spiritual purification over any formulaic recitation.

Comparative and Interfaith Perspectives

Parallels with Jewish Prayer Traditions

The Lord's Prayer shares thematic and structural elements with core Jewish liturgical texts, underscoring its roots in Second Temple Judaism rather than as a novel composition. The petition "hallowed be thy name" directly echoes the Kaddish's Aramaic opening, "Yitgadal v'yitkadash sh'mei rabbah" ("Magnified and sanctified be His great name"), a doxological prayer recited in synagogues since at least the early centuries CE, though with roots in earlier traditions. Similarly, "thy kingdom come" aligns with the Kaddish's subsequent plea, "May He establish His kingdom in your lifetime and in your days," invoking eschatological fulfillment of divine rule. These correspondences suggest the prayer draws from communal sanctification formulas common in Jewish worship, where God's name and sovereignty are exalted collectively. Parallels extend to the (Deuteronomy 6:4-9), recited twice daily in Jewish practice, which declares God's oneness and commands wholehearted devotion, resonating with the Lord's Prayer's emphasis on hallowing God's name and aligning human will to divine purposes. The Shema's call to "love the Lord your God with all your heart" (Deuteronomy 6:5) prefigures the prayer's petitions for provision and protection, framing prayer as obedient response to God's covenantal uniqueness. The Amidah, or Eighteen Benedictions (Shemoneh Esreh), central to daily Jewish prayer since the post-exilic period, further mirrors the structure: its blessings invoke God's name (first benediction), seek redemption and kingdom establishment (second and third), petition repentance and forgiveness (fourth through sixth), request sustenance (eighth), and plead for deliverance from affliction (twelfth). These align with the Lord's Prayer's sequence of sanctification, kingdom/will submission, daily bread, forgiveness, and rescue from evil, indicating a condensed adaptation of synagogue petitionary forms. Dead Sea Scrolls evidence, including the Hodayot (Thanksgiving Hymns, 1QH) from (ca. 100 BCE–68 CE), preserves individual hymns with pleas for divine cleansing, forgiveness of iniquity, and shielding from (evil forces), akin to "forgive us our debts" and "deliver us from evil." For instance, 1QH^a XIX:10-14 expresses reliance on God's mercy amid trial, reflecting the prayer's themes of tested fidelity and eschatological vindication. Such texts, attributed possibly to the , demonstrate supplicatory patterns in pre-Christian Jewish sectarian piety that intensify biblical motifs without departing from them. Collectively, these links position the Lord's Prayer as a distilled exemplar of Jewish prayer praxis, heightening communal and personal dependence on God within existing frameworks of recitation and theology.

Contrasts with Non-Christian Prayer Forms

The Lord's Prayer exemplifies a theocentric approach, centering on invocation of a singular, personal, transcendent God as "Father" and structured petitions for divine kingdom, will, provision, forgiveness, and protection from evil, reflecting a linear eschatological orientation toward ultimate redemption. In contrast, many non-Christian prayer forms exhibit polytheistic multiplicity, immanentist self-focus, or ritualistic repetition without equivalent emphasis on relational submission to a personal deity's sovereign will. Anthropological analyses of global prayer practices underscore this distinctiveness, noting Christianity's emphasis on verbal petition to an external, moral sovereign as diverging from animistic or cyclical invocations prevalent in indigenous and Eastern traditions. Islamic , the obligatory five daily , prioritizes physical submission through prescribed postures like standing, bowing, and prostration, accompanied by recitations from the , including the Fatiha , which seeks guidance and but lacks the Lord's Prayer's diverse petitions for daily bread, conditional on human , or from eschatological trial. While both affirm , functions as a formalized act of worship bound to specific times and orientations toward , emphasizing discipline and praise over the intimate, paternal address and moral reciprocity in the Christian form. Personal supplications (du'a) in allow greater flexibility akin to Christian extemporaneous , yet the core contrasts with the Lord's Prayer's role as a concise model for spontaneous, kingdom-oriented . Hindu mantras, such as the , involve repetitive chanting to invoke deities or cosmic forces for enlightenment or material benefit, often rooted in a cyclical view of time (samsara) aiming at liberation () through rather than submission to a linear divine kingdom. This phonetic and vibrational focus prioritizes internal transformation or union with the divine , diverging from the Lord's Prayer's explicit petitions to an external Father's will and eschatological consummation, which reject cyclical for historical fulfillment. Polytheistic or Advaita variants further differ by addressing multiple gods transactionally or dissolving ego into impersonal , without the Christian prayer's accountability to a personal offering unmerited . Secular practices, derived from Buddhist vipassana but stripped of theistic elements, emphasize non-judgmental awareness of the present moment to reduce stress, lacking of a personal or petitions for moral or cosmic intervention. Unlike the Lord's Prayer's relational dialogue fostering dependence on divine provision and ethical alignment, centers on self-regulation and ego observation, often critiqued as a psychologized derivative yielding intrapersonal benefits without transcendent accountability or eschatological hope. Empirical studies on prayer's effects highlight how theistic forms like the Lord's Prayer correlate with enhanced relational tied to belief in a responsive , contrasting secular variants' focus on autonomous mental hygiene.

Use in Linguistic and Pedagogical Contexts

The Lord's Prayer has been translated into over 500 languages, providing a standardized text for cross-linguistic comparisons in , , and syntax. These versions enable detailed analyses, such as line-by-line alignments across dozens of languages, highlighting structural parallels and divergences. In , reconstructions like Proto-Indo-European forms of the prayer draw on such translations to infer ancestral linguistic features. Pedagogically, the prayer's short length—typically 50-70 words—facilitates its use in , where learners memorize and compare versions to grasp basic vocabulary, sentence patterns, and idiomatic expressions. This method, involving parallel texts in target and known languages, supports rapid familiarity with morphology and phonology. In constructed languages, such as , standardized renderings like "Patro nia, kiu estas en la ĉielo" serve introductory lessons for quick mastery. During the 19th century, missionary organizations and Bible societies, including the Baptist Missionary Society, incorporated Lord's Prayer translations into broader scriptural efforts to vernacularize Christian texts for evangelization in and . These translations functioned as accessible entry points for and scriptural engagement in unwritten or newly documented languages. In contemporary applications, variants of the prayer contribute to datasets, aiding models in tasks like of biblical texts and translation alignment across historical corpora. For instance, approaches have processed passages, including the prayer, to evaluate tonal variations in multiple translations.

Controversies and Scholarly Debates

Translation Disputes and Semantic Accuracy

One prominent translation dispute in the Lord's Prayer centers on the phrase "forgive us our debts" in Matthew 6:12, where the Greek term opheilēmata denotes a legal or financial obligation owed, extended metaphorically to moral failings against God or others. This contrasts with renderings like "trespasses" or "sins," which derive not from the Matthean text but from liturgical traditions influenced by Matthew 6:14's paraptomata (offenses or deviations). Semantic analyses, including standard Koine Greek lexicons, affirm opheilēmata as implying indebtedness rather than mere wrongdoing, supporting "debts" for literal accuracy over interpretive expansions that risk diluting the covenantal imagery of reciprocal obligation. Another contention involves "lead us not into temptation" from Matthew 6:13, rendering Greek peirasmos, which encompasses testing, , or enticement across its semantic domain rather than solely inducement to . Lexical resources describe peirasmos as a proof or ordeal that may originate from divine allowance for refinement or adversarial , with determining nuance; in the prayer, it petitions avoidance of overwhelming trials, not accusation of God tempting toward evil as per James 1:13. Translations favoring "temptation" can imply a causal agency absent in the original, whereas "trial" aligns more closely with empirical studies of the term's usage in and . A recent example unfolded in French-speaking contexts starting in 2017, when proposals emerged to revise "ne nous soumets pas à la tentation" (do not subject us to temptation) to "ne nous laisse pas entrer en tentation" (do not let us enter into temptation), aiming to preclude any suggestion that induces . This shift, endorsed by figures like and implemented in some liturgies by 2020, sparked debate over fidelity to the Greek imperative against being conveyed into peril, potentially softening the petition's urgency by emphasizing human agency over divine guidance in trials. Critics argue such dynamic equivalence prioritizes theological comfort over semantic precision, as lexicon-supported readings retain the prayer's request for protection from eschatological testing without imputing fault to the divine will.

Theological Interpretations: Traditional vs. Modern

Traditional interpretations of the Lord's Prayer emphasize its role as a model for spiritual dependence on amid cosmic conflict with , as articulated by early like in the early 5th century. In his Enchiridion and sermons, Augustine portrayed the petitions, particularly "lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from ," as a plea for divine protection against internal sinful inclinations and external demonic assaults, framing prayer as active resistance in a fallen world where human frailty necessitates reliance on 's sovereignty. Reformation-era confessions reinforced this, with the (1647) expounding the prayer's structure to prioritize 's eternal kingdom and glory over temporal concerns, as in the "for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever," underscoring petitions that align believers with divine purposes beyond earthly exigencies. In contrast, modern progressive interpretations, emerging prominently in the mid-20th century, often recast the prayer through lenses of social activism, subordinating its eschatological focus to immediate human agendas. , formalized in Gustavo Gutiérrez's 1971 work A Theology of Liberation and echoed in subsequent analyses, reframes "" as a mandate for systemic overhaul against and , viewing the prayer as a blueprint for collective empowerment of the marginalized rather than individual submission to divine will. This approach, while drawing on scriptural calls for , risks inverting the prayer's causal priority—God's holiness and rule preceding human provision—by prioritizing terrestrial equity as the interpretive fulcrum, a shift critiqued for conflating imperatives with politicized outcomes absent in the text's Matthean context. A persistent modern debate centers on the paternal address "Our Father," with egalitarian and feminist theologians challenging it as reflective of ancient patriarchal norms rather than essential divine imagery. Critics, such as those advocating since the , argue the term perpetuates male dominance, proposing alternatives to mitigate perceived social harms from gendered pronouns for . Traditional counters that Jesus' deliberate Aramaic Abba (intimate "Father") conveys relational authority rooted in scriptural , not cultural concession, as evidenced by 's self-disclosure in texts like 64:8 amid Ancient Near Eastern societies where paternal headship structured households and covenants without egalitarian precedents. This paternal framing underscores causal realism in the prayer: divine initiative as authoritative source for filial dependence, empirically aligned with biblical over revisionist projections.

Cultural and Political Appropriations

In the 19th century, temperance movements in Britain, the United States, and Australia incorporated the Lord's Prayer into abstinence pledges and rituals, interpreting the petition for "daily bread" as a call for moral and physical sustenance through sobriety. For instance, Australian Abstinence Society medals issued around 1885 featured the full text of the Lord's Prayer alongside a pledge to abstain from alcohol, framing total abstinence as a fulfillment of the prayer's request for provision free from vice. Similarly, American temperance crusaders in the 1870s recited the prayer during marches against saloons, linking it to broader Social Gospel efforts that emphasized enacting the prayer's ethical imperatives in social reform, though such applications extended the text's focus on divine dependence into advocacy for legislative prohibition. This appropriation, while rooted in Protestant ethics, risked conflating personal spiritual reliance with collective political enforcement, as the original petition addresses immediate needs rather than systemic vice eradication. During the 20th-century American civil rights movement, activists recited the Lord's Prayer collectively at marches and gatherings to invoke unity and divine justice, often emphasizing phrases like "Thy kingdom come" as a mandate for earthly equality and desegregation. Participants in events such as the 1965 Selma marches used the prayer's communal form to foster solidarity amid persecution, drawing on its scriptural origins in Jesus' teachings to parallel their struggle against injustice. However, this usage sometimes projected eschatological elements—referring to a future divine reign—onto immediate socio-political goals, potentially overlooking the prayer's primary orientation toward God's sovereignty rather than human-engineered equity, a tension evident in how movement leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. blended biblical apocalypticism with pragmatic activism without fully reconciling the two. In modern political contexts, the Lord's Prayer has appeared in public oaths and ceremonies, such as school pledges or event invocations in the U.S., where it has faced legal challenges for establishing , as in the 1963 Supreme Court ruling against mandatory recitation in public schools. Such invocations, while evoking national heritage, have been critiqued for secularizing a theological text into civic , diluting its focus on and divine will into vague ; empirical reviews of U.S. public school practices post-1963 show persistent voluntary recitations in some regions, reflecting cultural resistance to but also highlighting causal overreach in assuming the prayer's universality endorses pluralistic governance. These appropriations underscore a pattern where the prayer's transcendent pleas are repurposed for ideological ends, often prioritizing temporal agendas over its scriptural intent.

Cultural Impact and Representations

Musical and Artistic Settings

The Lord's Prayer has been set to music since early Christianity, with the earliest surviving notations appearing in Gregorian chant traditions around the 9th century, though oral forms likely predate this. The Pater Noster chant, used in monastic and liturgical contexts, emphasizes rhythmic recitation over melodic complexity to foster contemplative devotion. During the Renaissance, polyphonic settings proliferated, highlighting the prayer's text through layered voices. Josquin des Prez composed a motet version of the Pater Noster circa 1500, employing canon and imitation to underscore theological unity and divine petition. In the Baroque era, Johann Sebastian Bach arranged Vater unser im Himmelreich (BWV 636) as an organ chorale prelude around 1710, drawing on Martin Luther's 1539 hymn paraphrase to integrate the prayer into Lutheran worship services. The 20th century saw accessible hymn-like settings emerge. Albert Hay Malotte's 1935 composition, a solo vocal piece with piano accompaniment, became a staple in evangelical and gatherings for its straightforward melody evoking personal supplication. Since the 1940s, the has employed repetitive choral chants of the Lord's Prayer in ecumenical prayer meetings, prioritizing meditative immersion over harmonic development. Artistic representations often depict the prayer in manuscript illuminations and visual works to aid devotion. Medieval codices, such as those from the 8th-11th centuries, feature ornate script and marginal illustrations framing the Pater Noster text for scriptural . James Tissot's The Lord's Prayer (1886–1896) portrays with arms raised in humility, symbolizing submission to divine will amid a heavenly . These settings prioritize spiritual edification, integrating the prayer's words into forms that reinforce its role as a model of Christian . In J.R.R. Tolkien's legendarium, the Lord's Prayer inspired the creation of Átaremma, a translation completed by the author, which echoes Christian amid his constructed world's themes of providence and endurance, though it appears outside the primary narrative of (1954). Númenórean rituals in Tolkien's works, such as the Three Prayers to Eru, parallel the prayer's structure of invocation and petition, underscoring devotional fidelity in a pre-Christian mythic framework. Films have employed the Lord's Prayer to evoke solemnity and human frailty. In Mel Gibson's (2004), Jim Caviezel as recites it in during sequences of agony in and scourging, amplifying the prayer's pleas for deliverance from suffering. Michael Cimino's (1978) features congregants chanting it at a , juxtaposing ritual comfort against the chaos of trauma, as steelworkers mourn a . Secular media often deploys ironic or satirical renditions to critique rote piety or hypocrisy. The Simpsons recurrently parodies the prayer, as in episodes where Homer mangles lines like "Give us this day our daily 'D'oh!'" to lampoon superficial religiosity and family dysfunction. The 2012 political satire The Campaign includes candidates Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis botching it onstage—"Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name... thy Magic Kingdom"—mocking opportunistic invocations of faith in electoral theater. Such uses highlight the prayer's permeation into popular discourse, blending reverence with subversion.

Enduring Influence on Ethics and Society

The petition for forgiveness in the Lord's Prayer—"forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"—has informed Christian ethical frameworks emphasizing mercy alongside accountability, contributing to the development of by early thinkers like (354–430 CE) and (1225–1274 CE), who integrated principles to balance defense against aggression with restraints on vengeance. This duality, seeking deliverance from evil while prioritizing reconciliation where feasible, shaped criteria such as legitimate authority, just cause, and proportionality in Western moral philosophy on conflict, influencing international law precedents like the of 1949. Empirical analyses of historical texts confirm that such prayer-derived ethics tempered militarism in , reducing indiscriminate warfare compared to pre-Christian tribal norms, though implementation varied by political context. The "give us this day our daily bread" clause reinforced norms of communal provision and humility before providence, embedding expectations of mutual aid in Western societies through early church practices of diakonia (service to the needy) that evolved into institutionalized charity. By the Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601, English statutes mandated parish relief for the destitute, explicitly drawing on Protestant interpretations of biblical sustenance duties akin to this petition, which framed poverty alleviation as a reciprocal ethical obligation rather than mere philanthropy. This influence persisted in colonial American welfare systems, where Puritan communities recited the prayer daily and linked it to covenantal care for the vulnerable, fostering social cohesion via structured almsgiving that predated modern state welfare. Contemporary studies link recitation of Christian prayers, including the Lord's Prayer, to enhanced prosocial behaviors such as increased generosity and empathy, with experiments showing participants exposed to adoration-focused prayer exhibiting greater willingness to aid others in economic games. Longitudinal data from churchgoing populations indicate religiosity correlates with prosociality via mechanisms like self-regulation, though effects diminish in secular contexts where habitual recitation wanes. In nations with enduring Christian heritage, such as Protestant-majority states, lower corruption indices (e.g., Transparency International scores averaging 70+ for top Nordic countries as of 2023) align with prayer-influenced ethical norms promoting trust and accountability, contrasting hierarchical religious systems; however, rising secularism since the 20th century has eroded these ties, correlating with fragmented social trust in de-Christianized regions. This suggests causal persistence of prayer-derived ethics in stabilizing institutions, per historical outcome analyses, despite debates over reverse causation from prosperity to irreligion.

References

  1. https://vts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Yieh-Lords-Prayer-1.pdf
  2. https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=hist_fac
  3. https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/the-development-of-the-lords-prayer/
  4. https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-hoole.html
  5. https://www.textandtranslation.org/the-didache-a-very-early-witness-to-the-doxology-in-matthew-613/
  6. https://scholar.dominican.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=religion-course-materials
  7. https://www.bobthune.com/blog/2006/05/the-lords-prayer-and-textual-criticism
  8. https://scriptura.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/1490/1375
  9. http://essays.wisluthsem.org:8080/bitstream/handle/123456789/1648/FredrichLordsPrayer.pdf?sequence=1
  10. https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1078&context=luc_diss
  11. https://notjustanotherbook.com/thelordsprayer.htm
  12. https://www.bartehrman.com/when-was-the-gospel-of-matthew-written/
  13. https://stpaulcenter.com/posts/when-were-the-gospels-written
  14. http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/2015/08/manuscripts-of-lords-prayer-bible.html
  15. https://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/Issues/2011/Spring-2011/The-Lords-Prayer
  16. https://www.psephizo.com/biblical-studies/where-do-we-find-the-holy-spirit-in-the-lords-prayer/
  17. https://free.messianicbible.com/feature/lords-prayer-jewish-prayer/
  18. https://studyingprayer.com/2019/11/01/the-lords-prayer-its-sources/
  19. https://catholicstand.com/jesus-changed-jewish-prayers-echoed-father/
  20. https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/files_JETS-PDFs_21_21-4_21-4-pp323-328_JETS.pdf
  21. https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/matthew-6/
  22. https://www.historian.net/lp-pap2.html
  23. https://genz.bible/Matthew/6
  24. https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/TheLordsPrayer
  25. https://www.bibleodyssey.org/articles/the-lords-prayer/
  26. https://albertmohler.com/2018/06/28/not-pray-two-correctives-christ/
  27. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/00346373221102910
  28. https://vridar.org/2019/06/16/jesus-did-not-compose-the-lords-prayer/
  29. https://ehrmanblog.org/what-is-the-didache-when-was-the-didache-written/
  30. https://ntcanon.org/Didache.shtml
  31. https://www.blueletterbible.org/mgnt/mat/6/1/
  32. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/30799/is-this-literal-translation-of-the-lord-prayer-faithful-to-the-greek-sources
  33. https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33
  34. https://www.thetextofthegospels.com/2018/11/matthew-613-how-does-lords-prayer-end.html
  35. https://thinkingwest.com/2020/04/17/epiousios-greek-our-father/
  36. https://wednesdayintheword.com/wordstudy-daily-epiousios/
  37. https://biblequestions.info/2019/12/14/how-does-the-quantity-of-new-testament-manuscripts-compare-to-other-ancient-manuscripts/
  38. https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/213801-the-aramaic-bible-in-plain-english-translation/
  39. https://galileanaramaic.com/articles/o-father-mother-birther-of-the-cosmos/
  40. https://abwoon.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/APwlinks2020.pdf
  41. https://hackingchristianity.net/2010/09/the-lords-prayer-aramaic-peshitta-version.html
  42. https://www2.arpel.org/index.jsp/u2D0DC/243217/AramaicPeshittaNewTestamentTranslationMessianicVersion.pdf
  43. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/19878/our-father-in-heaven-prayer-prose-or-verse
  44. https://vridar.org/2014/08/11/the-composition-of-the-lords-prayer/
  45. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43048834
  46. https://ehrmanblog.org/the-q-source-used-by-matthew-and-luke/
  47. https://www.bartehrman.com/q-source-hypothesis/
  48. https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/7854/23067
  49. https://vridar.org/2019/06/29/on-what-grounds-would-anyone-argue-that-lukes-lords-prayer-post-dates-matthews/
  50. https://www.crivoice.org/synoptic.html
  51. https://ehrmanblog.org/an-argument-for-q-the-hypothetical-source-that-seems-to-have-existed/
  52. https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/some-thoughts-on-q
  53. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09356a.htm
  54. http://www.ntcanon.org/Vulgate.shtml
  55. https://vulgate.org/nt/gospel/matthew_6.htm
  56. https://www.catholic.com/qa/most-bible-translations-use-the-word-debts-in-the-lords-prayer-so-why-do-we-say-forgive-us-our
  57. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/50255/a-question-about-supersubstantialem-in-matthew-611-vulgate
  58. https://www.internationalstandardbible.com/V/vulgate.html
  59. https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/lords-prayer
  60. https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=7470
  61. https://www.oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/spirituality/prayer-fasting-and-almsgiving/the-lords-prayer
  62. https://www.liturgies.net/Liturgies/Eastern/ChrysostomsLiturgy.htm
  63. https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/who-added-the-doxology-1002
  64. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/55499/what-is-the-history-behind-origin-of-the-doxology-that-often-gets-added-to-the-e
  65. https://brightmorningstar.org/lords-prayer-in-aramaic/
  66. https://www.soc-wus.org/2012News/611201213513.htm
  67. https://www.gorgiaspress.com/variants-in-the-syriac-peshitta
  68. https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/gallican-rite-the
  69. https://introducingmedievalchristianity.wordpress.com/2019/10/07/medieval-prayer/
  70. https://www.saintdominicsmedia.com/the-carolingians-use-of-liturgical-reform-to-defend-and-spread-frankish-culture/
  71. https://hilarywhite.substack.com/p/art-and-charlemagne-how-did-western
  72. https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1054
  73. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/107359/lord-s-prayer-forgive-us-our-debts-or-our-trespasses
  74. https://holyjoys.org/trespasses-debts-prayer/
  75. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%206%3A9-13&version=KJV
  76. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-6-12/
  77. https://www.churchofengland.org/prayer-and-worship/worship-texts-and-resources/book-common-prayer/lords-supper-or-holy-communion
  78. https://www.liturgy.io/anglican-1662-prayers
  79. https://www.englishtexts.org/the-lords-prayer
  80. https://www.liturgytools.net/2010/09/our-father-ellc.html
  81. https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/forgive-us-our-what
  82. https://classictheology.org/2025/05/19/the-lords-prayer-debts-or-trespasses/
  83. https://heidelblog.net/2017/12/the-translation-of-the-lords-prayer-is-not-a-mere-convention/
  84. https://museeprotestant.org/en/notice/martin-luther-translator-of-the-bible/
  85. https://witness.lcms.org/2010/are-there-different-versions-of-the-lords-prayer-3-2010/
  86. https://www.oursaviorlansing.org/how-does-the-lords-prayer-end/
  87. https://servantsofgrace.org/what-the-protestant-reformers-teach-us-about-prayer/
  88. https://rpwitness.org/article/john-calvin-on-prayer
  89. https://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_mt6_13.html
  90. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6_Original-1611-KJV/
  91. https://judah-lamb.com/blogs/sacred-meditations/the-missing-words-understanding-the-doxology-of-the-lords-prayer
  92. https://www.catholicbishops.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Order-of-Mass.pdf
  93. https://catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/MassTexts-English-Spanish-booklet-withLoH.pdf
  94. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/08/569385769/pope-francis-suggests-changing-the-words-to-lord-s-prayer
  95. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42279427
  96. https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2017/12/09/should-the-sixth-petition-of-the-our-father-be-translated-as-do-not-let-us-fall/
  97. https://www.goarch.org/-/lords-prayer
  98. https://www.oca.org/reflections/fr.-lawrence-farley/the-lords-prayer-the-final-doxology
  99. https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/249916/pew-survey-half-of-us-catholics-pray-every-day-and-the-number-is-dropping
  100. http://holyjoe.org/indulgences/Indulgences_1999.pdf
  101. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A9-13&version=ESV
  102. https://clarionherald.org/news/explaining-the-seven-petitions-of-the-our-father
  103. https://biblehub.com/q/Luke_11_4_s_role_in_Lord_s_Prayer.htm
  104. https://fpcjackson.org/resource-library/sermons/the-lords-purpose-and-provision-in-the-lords-prayer/
  105. https://friarmusings.com/2022/07/19/the-communal-nature-of-the-lords-prayer/
  106. https://www.postost.net/commentary/lord-s-prayer-eschatological-context
  107. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A9-11&version=ESV
  108. https://www.preceptaustin.org/matthew_69-10
  109. https://www.gotquestions.org/hallowed-be-thy-name.html
  110. https://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/The_Coming_Kingdom_by_Andy_Woods/82_why_does_it_matter_7/20191120_82_coming_kingdom_transcript.html
  111. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+2%3A44&version=ESV
  112. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+26%3A42&version=ESV
  113. https://www.gotquestions.org/thy-will-be-done.html
  114. http://theotivity.com/post/an-exegesis-application-of-the-lords-prayer/
  115. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Joshua+5%3A12&version=ESV
  116. http://experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2014/09/exodus-food.html
  117. https://depree.org/life-for-leaders/praying-like-jesus-give-us-this-day-our-daily-bread/
  118. https://biblehub.com/greek/3783.htm
  119. https://www.bibleref.com/Matthew/6/Matthew-6-12.html
  120. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0322.htm
  121. https://doctrine.org/the-lords-prayer
  122. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1681&context=masters
  123. https://www.biblicaljesus.org/index.cfm/library/sermon/id/5543/lead-us-not-into-temptation.htm
  124. https://mycatholic.life/books/our-father/chapter-nine-deliver-us/
  125. https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-lords-prayer-doxology-for-the-kingdom
  126. https://cov-pres.org/resources/the-lords-prayer-part-9-the-power-and-the-glory/
  127. https://ac3.org/2018/04/is-the-doxology-from-the-lords-prayer-authentic
  128. https://forwardinchrist.net/qa-doxology-lords-prayer/
  129. https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/a-protestant-doxology-sneaked-into-the-mass
  130. https://www.tbsbibles.org/page/Matthew6verse13
  131. https://www.churchofengland.org/faith-life/what-we-believe/lords-prayer
  132. https://anglicancompass.com/the-lords-prayer-a-rookie-anglican-guide/
  133. https://www.usccb.org/prayers/our-father
  134. https://www.liturgyoffice.org.uk/Missal/Text/MCNL.pdf
  135. https://www.oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/worship/the-divine-liturgy/our-father
  136. https://www.orthodoxprayer.org/Lords_Prayer.html
  137. https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/the-mystery-of-the-our-fathers-ending
  138. https://www.slte.org/father-kens-quill/2023/3/25/why-are-the-catholic-and-protestant-versions-of-the-lords-prayer-different
  139. https://www.faithandworship.com/Prayer_in_the_early_Church.htm
  140. https://www.apuritansmind.com/puritan-favorites/thomas-manton-1620-1677/the-works-of-thomas-manton-volume-1/a-practical-exposition-of-the-lords-prayer-by-thomas-manton/
  141. https://medium.com/illumination/the-positive-and-negative-effects-of-religion-with-insights-from-cognitive-science-1df5c98c2591
  142. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6369522/
  143. https://lectio365.com/
  144. https://hallow.com/
  145. https://www.ncregister.com/blog/seven-sacraments-our-father
  146. http://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_01011967_indulgentiarum-doctrina.html
  147. https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/twenty-fifth-session.htm
  148. https://www.catholic.com/qa/does-the-catholic-church-still-sell-indulgences
  149. https://anschechesed.org/the-lords-prayer/
  150. https://changingmymind.substack.com/p/the-lords-prayer-and-the-kaddish
  151. https://stephenmillerbooks.com/did-jesus-borrow-the-lords-prayer/
  152. https://explorethebible.lifeway.com/blog/adults/the-shema-and-the-lords-prayer/
  153. https://theparkforum.org/843-acres/the-shema-and-the-lords-prayer/
  154. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-thanksgiving-psalms
  155. https://www.pcusastore.com/Content/Site119/FilesSamples/226416TheLordsP_00000128119.pdf
  156. https://aboutislam.net/counseling/ask-about-islam/different-types-prayer/
  157. https://blogs.butler.edu/ghs208spring2020/2020/03/23/salah-compared-to-common-christian-prayer/
  158. https://114chambers.wordpress.com/2015/07/11/the-difference-between-salat-and-dua-what-is-prayer/
  159. https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-comparison-between-the-core-prayers-of-Christianity-Lords-Prayer-Islam-Fatiha-and-Hinduism-Gayatri
  160. https://www.orthodoxprayer.org/Articles_files/Farasiotis-JesusPrayer-HinduMantra.html
  161. https://gingerjar2.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/the-hindu-mantra-christian-mysticism-and-the-jesus-prayer/
  162. https://hallow.com/blog/whats-the-difference-between-mindfulness-meditation-and-christian-meditation/
  163. https://www.christianity.org.uk/article/meditation-mindfulness-and-prayer
  164. https://abide.com/blog/biblical-meditation-vs-eastern-meditation/
  165. https://ministrants.com/lords-prayer.php
  166. https://www.reddit.com/r/IndoEuropean/comments/13tvgje/a_published_translation_of_the_lords_prayer_into/
  167. https://www.reddit.com/r/languagelearning/comments/1ivqc74/lords_prayer_technique_to_language_learning/
  168. https://www.masteranylanguage.com/c/r/en/Esperanto/TheLordsPrayer
  169. https://brill.com/display/book/9789004494275/B9789004494275_s012.pdf
  170. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1873&context=re
  171. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2401.00689
  172. https://arxiv.org/html/2401.00689v1
  173. http://www.thisunchartednow.org/blog/2014/05/02/debts-and-trespasses
  174. https://mpchurchpa.org/forgive-us-ourdebts-trespasses-sins-2/
  175. https://www.reddit.com/r/Bible/comments/1mrltd4/i_have_a_very_serious_question_since_when_is_the/
  176. https://puritanboard.com/threads/praying-for-trespasses-or-debts.53375/
  177. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/87/forgive-us-our-debts-sins-trespasses-which-is-the-most-accurate-transla
  178. http://biblehub.com/greek/3783.htm
  179. https://ezraproject.com/peirasmos-is-it-from-god-or-from-satan/
  180. http://biblehub.com/greek/3986.htm
  181. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3986/kjv/tr/0-1/
  182. https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/peirasmos
  183. https://godblog.org/temptation-in-the-lords-prayer/
  184. https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1029/why-pray-lead-us-not-into-temptation
  185. https://danielbwallace.com/2017/12/12/pope-francis-the-lords-prayer-and-bible-translation/
  186. https://www.ncronline.org/spirituality/does-god-lead-us-sin-new-french-our-father-says-no
  187. https://nation.africa/kenya/news/world/god-can-no-longer-lead-sinners-astray-in-france-s-new-lord-s-prayer-483236
  188. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/lead-us-not-into-mistranslation-pope-wants-lords-prayer-changed
  189. https://religionunplugged.com/news/2017/12/8/lead-us-not-into-confusion-the-lords-prayer-in-french
  190. https://bishopserratelli.org/news/the-our-father-and-lead-us-not-into-temptation
  191. https://embracing.life/article/petitioning-the-lord-through-the-lord-s-prayer
  192. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/160307.htm
  193. https://www.opc.org/documents/LC_handouts/larger_cat_Q196.pdf
  194. https://chrisbrauns.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Westminster-Confessions-and-Heidelberg-Catechism-on-the-Lords-Prayer1.pdf
  195. https://ebonyjohanna.com/2014/07/12/the-lords-prayer-a-social-justice-theology/
  196. https://sandhyajha.com/2013/07/01/first-person-plural-the-lords-prayer-and-liberation/
  197. https://ebonyjohanna.com/2014/07/30/the-lords-prayer-as-social-justice-theology-your-kingdom-come-and-will-be-done-part-4/
  198. https://theconversation.com/a-feminist-theologian-says-our-father-is-not-the-only-way-of-referring-to-god-200141
  199. https://www.fsrinc.org/perceiving-the-image-of-god/
  200. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09667350231183070
  201. https://www.cbeinternational.org/resource/the-father-and-the-feminine-assessing-the-grammar-of-gender-inclusive-god-language/
  202. https://collections.museumsvictoria.com.au/items/55173
  203. https://highlandcountypress.com/news/temperance-crusaders-march-historic-route-through-uptown-hillsboro
  204. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24488058
  205. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/opth-2015-0002/html
  206. https://www.edweek.org/education/school-prayer-decisions-resonate-nearly-50-years-later/2011/05
  207. https://www.findlaw.com/education/student-rights/school-prayer-and-the-pledge-of-allegiance-background.html
  208. https://www.english.op.org/godzdogz/our-father-musical-settings-of-the-lords-prayer/
  209. https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/02/gregorian-chant-perfect-music-for.html
  210. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsgeignONBM
  211. https://www.bachvereniging.nl/en/bwv/bwv-636
  212. https://hymnary.org/tune/malotte_malotte
  213. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMiBsSVznnk
  214. https://lafiacraft.com/blogs/bible-study/the-lords-prayer-a-timeless-source-of-creative-inspiration-through-the-centuries
  215. https://www.artchive.com/artwork/the-lord-s-prayer-james-tissot-1886-1896/
  216. https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/zh-CN/objects/4531
  217. https://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Three_Prayers
  218. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isn5BpqiCQo
  219. http://deanaanderson.blogspot.com/2007/11/lords-prayer-in-movies.html
  220. http://www.amiright.com/parody/misc/traditional820.shtml
  221. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhl1cnmOZ0Y
  222. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/z7sc239
  223. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/ztjy8p3
  224. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0040571X231209468
  225. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/sermon/just-war/
  226. https://www.studylight.org/commentary/matthew/6-11.html
  227. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo/A51845.0001.001/1:6.1?rgn=div2%3Bview=fulltext
  228. https://www.gracegems.org/Ryle/m06.htm
  229. https://nepsych.org/the-effects-of-prayer-on-prosocial-behavior/
  230. https://labs.psychology.illinois.edu/pramlab/Papers/Religious_Prosociality_Chapter.pdf
  231. https://sites.duke.edu/bablab/files/2021/01/10_Religiosity-and-Prosocial-Behavior-Among-Churchgoers-Exploring-Underlying-Mechanisms.pdf
  232. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391441446_Religiosity_and_its_Relationship_with_Prosocial_Behavior_The_Mediating_Role_of_Intentional_Self-regulation
  233. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10360949/
  234. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2025/02/26/decline-of-christianity-in-the-us-has-slowed-may-have-leveled-off/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.