Talk:Lord's Prayer/Archive 3
Page contents not supported in other languages.
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Under “Hallowed be thy name”
The Lord's Prayer first off is a model of how to pray not to be repeated exactly word for word. I feel that this persons references and explanations is not correct scripturally, God's name in English translated by a 12th Century Monseigneur of the Catholic Church to be "Jehovah"
Different versions support the use of His name in your prayers. Here Jesus said called him father because it was his father as the scriptures say he was in a bossom position with his father. But his father is one God with the name translated in English for centuries as Jehovah. The Scriptures prove that.
"Psalm 83:18 (King James Version) 18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth." & "Psalm 83:18 (21st Century King James Version) 18that men may know that Thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth." & "Psalm 83:18 (American Standard Version) 18 That they may know that thou alone, whose name is Jehovah, Art the Most High over all the earth. " & "Psalm 83:18 (Young's Literal Translation) 18And they know that Thou -- (Thy name [is] Jehovah -- by Thyself,) [Art] the Most High over all the earth!" & "Psalm 83:18 (Darby Translation) 18That they may know that thou alone, whose name is Jehovah, art the Most High over all the earth." & "Salmos 83:18 (Reina-Valera 1960) 18 Y conozcan que tu nombre es Jehová; Tú solo Altísimo sobre toda la tierra. " So the truth is in English not Hebrew which some use and is called "Yahweh" in Hebrew.
But then Jesus is "Yeshivas" or something of that nature in Hebrew also so why are they not using his Hebrew name?
It also says He is alone Jehovah not a trinity that is not even scriptural at all.
The reason Jehovah is used is it is the most closely translated of all the versions of his name in English. The Tetragrammaton "YHWH" in ancient Hebrew had no valves. So in English it would have been "JHVH" Jehovah was the only one that had all the main letters "JHVH" in it.
So the question about How does removing God's name from the bible and replacing it with a title glorify, sanctify or hallowed God's name? It hides his name as translated into English. That means there is a cover up taking place on who God really is so as to promote a false doctrine that was adopted into Christianity in the 2nd century to the 4th century by the Roman's, (Mainly Emperor Constantin), so to get the loyalty of there people as strong as the True Christians who died faithful in the Roman arena's and Colosseum.
Joel 2:32 (Darby Translation)(First Half) 32"And it shall be that whosoever shall call upon the name of Jehovah shall be saved:"Joel 2:32 (Young's Literal Translation)(First Half) 32"And it hath come to pass, Every one who calleth in the name of Jehovah is delivered"
Also as a cross reference it is suppose to read like the New World Translation here reads at Acts 2:21 "And everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”’ But the Trinitarian's have worked their way into leaving out his name and replacing it with a title, "Lord" or "God". So using this model prayer without making hallowed his name or using his name in prayer is useless.
In the original texts it had the Name Jehovah over 2,000 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Which was originally in Aramaic according to the Moslem's who know God's Name is Jehovah in English. You can not find it 1 time in modern translations for the most part. In the Hebrew Scriptures is was over 5,000 times. In modern scriptures they completely removed his name so no one would know who's name to call on and be saved.
When we pray the Lord's prayer which is a example or model prayer and should not be repeated word for word, we are suppose to pray to Jehovah our Creator and God so as to sanctify his name or make it known as holy. We are suppose to Use his name or as the scriptures put it "call upon the name of Jehovah".
If you family member talks to you, say your son or daughter do you want them to call you "Hey Dude" or "Dude" or even "Mister"? No way, you want your family members to call you by name or Dad which Jesus always called him his "father". Because Jesus is his son, Not him, Jehovah, who the scriptures says is "alone" not a tri-union being which by the way originated in Ancient Babylon starting with Nimrod and his mother and another name for Nimrod. "Tau" or "Tamaz" I think it was?
We end the prayer "through Jesus Christ Name (as our mediator to Jehovah God), Amen".
The preface of the Revised Standard Version explains: “For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) the word ‘Jehovah’ does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom he had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” (Thus their own view of what is appropriate has been relied on as the basis for removing from the Holy Bible the personal name of its Divine Author, whose name appears in the original Hebrew more often than any other name or any title. They admittedly follow the example of the adherents of Judaism, of whom Jesus said: “You have made the word of God invalid because of your tradition.”—Matt. 15:6.) So the point in this scripture is this. With these new translations of the bible completely missing the true name of God, our heavenly father, Jehovah. Then would not your prayers be invalid if you do not show honor to his name by using it?
I am sure this will be edited out because they do not want the public to hear the truth. The scriptures speak for themselves that I quoted here. They tell the truth and I am sure you have scriptures that say whatever you want them to say but this is plain English and it says it all right in the scriptures quoted. Jehovah is God, alone. Jesus was the first-born and only-begotten Son of God, through whom Jehovah created all other things visible and invisible. (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:15-18; Rev. 3:14)
“The head of the Christ is God.” Christ and God are not coequal, as trinitarians contend.—Phil. 2:6; John 14:28; 1 Cor. 15:28; 11:3, NWT And Jesus is not God! He is the Son of God as the scriptures makes clear.
They are not coeternal, as supporters of the trinity teaching say. Of Jehovah it is written: “Even from eternity to eternity thou art God.” He is called “the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity” and “the king of eternity.” Hence he was not born, was not created, had no beginning. But this is not true of Jesus Christ, for he is called “the firstborn of all creation,” “the beginning of the creation by God.”—Ps. 90:2; Isa. 57:15; Jer. 10:10, Da; Col. 1:15, 16; Rev. 3:14, NWT
This point should be remembered: the trinity doctrine says God and Christ and the holy spirit are three persons making the one true God. That means three in one. John 10:30 speaks of only two being one. That has nothing to do with trinity, the three-in-one doctrine. Only 1 John 5:7 in the King James and Douay Bible versions can be construed to support trinity, and that text is spurious and is left out of most modern Bible versions. No authentic Bible text supports the trinity doctrine.
So to Sanctify, Glorify, Hallowed Be thy name you need to use his name in prayer and call upon his name to be delivered from the evil one, Satan the Devil and his demons or fallen angels. Satan knows the scriptures and he is the God of this system of things on earth at this time. He wants you to not call on Jehovah God's Name. Thus his false doctrines and his broad and spacious road to destruction he has created to tickle your ears. False Christianity and false religions. The bible is clear he can come to you as a angel of light. And he rules all the nations as Jesus 3rd test in the wilderness showed when he presented them all to Jesus if he would bow down and do a act of obeisance to Satan. Jesus did not deny Satan had all the nations in his power to give to Jesus. Know your enemy! Study the bible. Use the name Jehovah in your prayers unless you are of another tongue besides English then use what it is translated into but not a title like Lord or God or even Allah when means God, it also is a title.
As for “Thy Kingdom Come”
I think the scripture at Rev. 11:18 in the last half sums it up: Revelation 11:18 (New International Version)"18 The nations were angry, and your wrath has come. The time has come for judging the dead, and for rewarding your servants the prophets and your people who revere your name, both great and small and for destroying those who destroy the earth.”The word "Kingdom" is a government. So basically you are praying for God's Government over the earth as it is already over the Heavens.“To him was given dominion and glory and kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.”—Dan. 7:14, RS.
Revelation 21:1-4 (New International Version)"1 Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”[a] for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. 2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. 4 ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’[b] or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” "Revelation 21:3-4 (New American Standard Bible)"3And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, "Behold, (A)the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will (B)dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them[a], 4and He will (C)wipe away every tear from their eyes; and (D)there will no longer be any death; (E)there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; (F)the first things have passed away."
Revelation 21:3-4 (New World Translation or NWT) " 3 With that I heard a loud voice from the throne say: “Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. 4 And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.”"More to come: Matthew 5:5 (Darby Translation)" 5 Blessed the meek, for *they* shall inherit the earth."Matthew 5:5 (NWT) "Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the earth."Psalm 37:29 (New International Version)"29 The righteous will inherit the land and dwell in it forever."1 Corinthians 15:26 (New International Version)"26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death."There are more prophesies that will take place in this perfect Heavenly based Government of Jehovah God's ruled for a thousand years by Jesus Christ from in heaven.But notice the Tabernacle or Tent of God is going to be with? Angels? or Men or Mankind?You are praying for a Government ruled by God from on high which can not be corrupted as man made governments are. Imperfect mankind can not fix the mess it has made for this planet and we have to have divine intervention for mankind to even survive at this point. We are like a amoeba compared to the greatness and glory of Jehovah God. The more we learn the more we realize we have just scratched to surface of all of creation. He promises that death will be done away with and we can live forever on the earth as we are praying that his government rule the earth as it already does the heavens. There are scriptures in Isaiah that say our flesh will become like that of new born infants. Jesus, his son when on earth already showed that he can heal any kind of sickness or deformity and resurrect the dead.If you want to live forever under his heavenly based government the scriptures are clear on the matter.John 17:3 (New International Version)"3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."John 17:3 (NWT) "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ."And as above I already showed from the bibles who the true God is, Jehovah, our God: Psalms 83:18The Scriptures make it clear. This wicked world of mankind is to be destroyed. But there are to be survivors and John 17:3 is the start to your survival and it does not say the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit there. It is only talking of Jehovah and his son he sent to earth to prepare us for what is to come and to give his life to buy us back out of sin. A perfect life bought us into sin and a perfect life bought us back out of sin. Balanced justice just as all the laws of our creator in creation are in perfect balance. So will his government be. His purpose for mankind has never changed. We are to have a perfect garden paradise world wide with us living forever upon the earth and in harmony with all of creation.At present we only use 1/10 of our brains. Imagine a perfect mind? Perfect body control. Perfect health. Never tiring out. The sky is the limit and with perfect minds we will not need computers. We will have photographic memories.That is what we have in store under the Government of Jehovah God and his son Jesus is going to bring it about real soon. As Revelations 11:18 shows.(NWT)"But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time for the dead to be judged, and to give [their] reward to your slaves the prophets and to the holy ones and to those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”"So he is going to fix the earth when he brings to ruin those ruining the earth with his government over all of mankind. That is a promise and Jehovah God can not lie according to the scriptures. Not like Politicians, is he? No, he is not. What he says comes to be. So take in knowledge of him and you will make it if you apply that knowledge. There are many peoples versions of the truth but the bible is your compass in stormy waters. Follow it and you will get to see a earth you can not even imagine at present. There will be no greed and suppression of inventions and cures and knowledge under his government. There will be no corruption and crime. There will be know Satan to mislead you after the thousand years end and he tests mankind one more time. He also will be destroyed permanently.Mankind has already shown he can not rule himself. We need our perfect designer to lead us to perfection and then he will give us new tasks to accomplish. You will not get bored under his rule. You will not be suppressed. You will only have to obey his commandments and everything else will be taken care of. Since his greatest attribute is Love. You know you will feel a joy you never even knew existed. That is what you are praying for! (HawkNo1 (talk) 19:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by HawkNo1 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
If that is the case then why in the scripture at Psalms 83:18 from so many different bibles say Jehovah is one alone? Also show me in the Scriptures where it Says Jehovah and Jesus and the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit are one being? It does not. It is not scripturally supported. The bible is the definitive of the truth and it corrects the lies itself. Scholars can misinterpret all they want, but the bible will always show the truth for what it really is. I do not have to say it. The scriptures say it in plain English. When you have all the different translations and versions pointing to the same conclusion then even though they have little alterations here and there they are all when compared showing you the truth of the matter and to Glorify Gods name you have to use it.John 17:6; John 17:26 (New International Version) 6 "I have revealed you[a] to those whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours; you gave them to me and they have obeyed your word."Footnotes in NIV:
[a] John 17:6 Greek "your name"
John 17:26; 26 "I have made you[a] known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them."Footnotes in NIV:
[a] John 17:26 Greek "your name"
If the Greek here says "your name" instead of "you" is that not someone trying to hide what Jesus is saying about to his father in prayer?
(NWT) John 17:6 "6 I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have observed your word"
(NWT) John 17:26 "26 And I have made your name known to them and will make it known, in order that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them."
There goes the trinity doctrine also. Now Jesus is in Union with more than just Jehovah but with all the disciples he was entrusted with by Jehovah. Those are his own words. Just like he in other places said he was in union or one with Jehovah God. The trinitarians twisted it to say he was separate but one in Jehovah, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost as one. Here this means he was much more than 3 in 1 if you plan to twist the truth here. You might as well go all the way? He was 15 in one? 12 apostles, God, Holy Ghost and Jesus?
You see he was one in purpose with Jehovah God and with his disciples they where all one in purpose, not physically one or in one spirit creature.
The NIV was a version to help support the trinity which is why they changed crucial translations of this section to read "you" instead to the truth with "your name". Jehovah's name was very important to Jesus and it was important to all the true Christians of that time as it is shown here. Just a little tweaking in the translation of the bible like that is enough to throw people off from the truth because it is working. Refer to Matthew 7:13-14
Matthew 7:13-14 (New International Version or NIV) 13 "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." (BOLD IS MINE FOR EMPHASIS)
Matthew 7:13-14 (NWT) 13 "Go in through the narrow gate; because broad and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are the ones going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are the ones finding it."
You need to get off that broad road leading to destruction by using the bible itself to correct things. Not the word of some bible scholar like it was in Jesus day also. They twisted the truth back then in the Jewish nation and they are doing the same world wide today. You need to glorify Jehovah God's name and as for the part about the Kingdom. Are you kidding me? A Kingdom back then was a government as it is today. If Satan did not have them to offer then as bold as Jesus was don't you think he would have pointed that out to Satan when he was at the end of his 40 day trek through the wilderness? If Satan did not have the power to offer him all the Kingdoms of the World then Jesus would have said something like "Who you think you are fooling Satan? You can not give what is not yours to give." He did not because as the scriptures puts it:1 John 5:19 (NWT) 19 "We know we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the [power of the] wicked one."
Luke 4:5-8 (NWT) 5 So he brought him up and showed him all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth in an instant of time; 6 and the Devil said to him: “I will give you all this authority and the glory of them, because it has been delivered to me, and to whomever I wish I give it. 7 You, therefore, if you do an act of worship before me, it will all be yours.” 8 In reply Jesus said to him: “It is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”
I want to point out that Jesus said it was written "It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service."
This is Jesus speaking and he is referring to the scriptures.
(Deuteronomy 6:13)NWT Jehovah your God you should fear, and him you should serve, and by his name you should swear.
(Deuteronomy 10:20) NWT “Jehovah your God you should fear. Him you should serve, and to him you should cling, and by his name you should make sworn statements.
Deuteronomy 6:13 (Darby Translation) 13Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name.
Deuteronomy 10:20 (Darby Translation) 20Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; him thou shalt serve, and unto him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name.
Deuteronomy 6:13 (Young's Literal Translation) 13Jehovah thy God thou dost fear, and Him thou dost serve, and by His name thou dost swear;
Deuteronomy 10:20 (Young's Literal Translation) 20`Jehovah thy God thou dost fear, Him thou dost serve, and to Him thou dost cleave, and by His name thou dost swear.
Deuteronomy 6:13 (American Standard Version) 13 Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; and him shalt thou serve, and shalt swear by his name.
Deuteronomy 10:20 (American Standard Version) 20 Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; him shalt thou serve; and to him shalt thou cleave, and by his name shalt thou swear.
In all the rest of the Bibles I have access too, they substituted God's name, "Jehovah" with "LORD" or "Lord". A title. This next one at least references Luke 4:8
Deuteronomy 6:13 (English Standard Version) 13It is(A) the LORD your God you shall fear. Him you shall serve and(B) by his name you shall swear.Cross references:
(A) Deuteronomy 6:13 : Cited Matt 4:10; Luke 4:8 (B) Deuteronomy 6:13 : Deuteronomy 10:20; Josh 2:12; Psalm 63:11; Isa 45:23; 65:16; Jer 12:16
The New American Standard Bible replaces Jehovah with Lord also but they also have the same cross references as the English Standard Bible.
I think the bibles have made Jehovah's case here. Jesus had to let his disciples know God's name was Jehovah so as to glorify or sanctify or hallowed Jehovah's name because the Scribes and Pharisees of his time had already removed Jehovah's name from their manuscripts.
Same is happening today with all these Apostates playing like they are true Christians with much bible knowledge. They are even misinterpreting the meaning of the Model Prayer or Lord's Prayer as it is called here.
Definition of Kingdom:1.a country with a king as head of state2.the domain ruled by a king or queen
Today Kings ruling and Queens ruling is pretty much done away with but it was a country at that time and at that time it was a government. Not the governments we have on earth today mostly but it was a form of government for that time period. Jesus was offered all the Kingdoms or countries or governments as he would have become the ruler of the world if he did a act of worship to Satan the Devil. For the next thousand years he is going to be ruling the world anyway so why lose Jehovah God's favor and do it back then with Satan who is going to be destroyed and all those following Satan will also be destroyed.
All these Apostates who twist the scriptures are also going to be destroyed. So you can follow them if you like since you will have a lot of company on that road to destruction. As for me, I worship our Creator Jehovah God and I do so through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ his only begotten son and who everything else came to be through his son, Jesus, in his pre-human form in the beginning. (98.207.151.28 (talk) 11:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC))
Why does this article use the phrase quite different to describe the versions of the Lord's Prayer in Gospel of Matthew and Gospel of Luke?It is debatable that they are all that diffent.Vorbee (talk) 22:58, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
"Forgive us our"...heard different words following this: debts and debtors, sins and sin against us, transgressions and transgressors, trespasses and transpassers.
I was raised in a particular religion, but the analogy seems to be equally similar, so I would imagine whatever religious context your faith chooses to use would not be unacceptable or inappropriate.159.118.57.202 (talk) 05:24, 30 December 2016 (UTC)Ange B.In Him and Happy Holydays :)
The text of the (Latin) Missale Romanum is unaffected by changes to translations such as the English Roman Missal, the Italian Messale Romano, the French Missel romain, the Polish Mszał rzymski, the Esperanto Roma Meslibro, ... Signature by Bealtainemí omitted by mistake.
In the beginning of the article comparison of Matthew 6 and Luke 11 prayers. One who added words in square brackets violated the essence of comparison.Evrey9 (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
The phrase in brackets is in some authorities for Luke. The difference between the passages is that apparently no authorities for Matthew lack the phrase, while the translators judge that the dominant authorities for Luke lack the phrase. --Jfhutson (talk) 21:13, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
The relevant sentence currently reads: "An early use of a doxology, 'for yours is the power and the glory forever', as a conclusion for the Lord's Prayer is in the Didache, 8:2." Its appearance in the Didache may in fact be the "first known" or the "earliest" but neither of the two cited sources support those claims. Until a reliable source is found and cited that supports the claim editors should not engage in original research.--Mox La Push (talk) 07:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
You're welcome.--Mox La Push (talk) 08:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
In the Doxology section Zola is cited in support of the following: "The first three editions of the UBS 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." This is true as far as it goes but it is also a questionable use of Zola, who writes: "While UBS4-5 made laudable efforts in its revision of Diatessaronic evidence, some deficiencies remain." The change from UBS1-3 regarding the doxology is one of the two examples of said deficiencies that Zola gives. Zola notes that part of the problem is UBS1-3 implied "the Arabic version [of the Diatessaron] includes the doxology, which it does at 9:36" but UBS4-5 omits it only on the basis of Diatessaronsyr, indicating, according to Zola, "this reading [without the doxology] only appears in the Syriac version of Ephrem's Commentary." Zola expands further on why this is a problem, concluding: "We are back to battling witnesses." It seems an additional sentence or explanatory note may be in order in the article text.--Mox La Push (talk) 08:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Suggest adding a sentence to the end of the first paragraph under 'Similarities with Jewish Prayer'
It has been suggested that the various petitions of the Lord's Prayer, as well as its closing doxology, have a conceptual and thematic background in the Old Testament book of Psalms.[1]
Thus the paragraph would read:
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.[89] These elements include both biblical and post-biblical material in Jewish prayer, especially Kiddushin 81a (Babylonian).[90] "Our Father which art in heaven" (אבינו שבשמים, Avinu shebashamayim) is the beginning of many Hebrew prayers.[91] "Hallowed be thy name" is reflected in the Kaddish. "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." There are parallels also in 1 Chronicles 29:10–18.[73][90] It has been suggested that the various petitions of the Lord's Prayer, as well as its closing doxology, have a conceptual and thematic background in the Old Testament book of Psalms.[2]
I refer here to my own work on the OT background of the Lord's Prayer.
ReubenBredenhof (talk) 08:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Reuben Bredenhof - 4 August 2020
Hello, dear colleague Elizium23 . Please explain the cancellation of my edit. Link given, translation provided. What is the problem? This is purely scientific research, and not mine. You have any objections, please provide them. Why are you undoing while writing: "Reverted good faith edits by Wlbw68 (talk): Mostly unsourced". If confessional affiliation prevents you from accepting scientific facts, then this is not at all good. Wlbw68 (talk) 02:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Further scientists look at the chronology. Papyrus 75 and the Codex Vaticanus is older than the rest of the manuscripts. If there were no words before, and then they appear in the texts, this means that this is a later insertion. The situation is the same as, for example, with the insertion into this prayer at the end of the words: "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, For ever and ever. Amen." This phrase is not found in any ancient manuscript. You can open any and see for yourself. Or the same situation with Johannine Comma. If something did not exist before, and then appears, then this is a later insertion. Of course, I understand that someone will not like this state of affairs, but how can you argue with scientific facts? The situation is as follows. One of the scribes wrote in the margins his explanation of the text, and the next scribe entered this phrase into the text itself. I myself observed this on the example of Johannine Comma in ancient Russian manuscripts. Wlbw68 (talk) 04:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
I well understand that it is difficult to accept such a thing.
Matthew | Luke[1] |
---|---|
Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς | Πάτερ |
According to Harnack (Marcion: The Gospel of the Alien God, p.44 Wiph and Stock edition, 2001) the phrase "do not lead" should be "do not allow us to be led" according to Marcion. (the Pope about 2000 years too late) 47.54.7.39 (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
In the text, phrases that begin with the words: "Other ancient authorities read" are formatted as links. Why add links to the text to confuse people? This text itself, in the presence of such phrases, is completely unauthorized and not scientific. Who are "Other ancient authorities"? What are their names when they lived? No self-respecting serious author in scientific work will write like that. Wlbw68 (talk) 22:12, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The original text of the prayer was in Aramaic. Greek, Latin, English texts are translations, not original texts. Do you agree with that?Wlbw68 (talk) 23:30, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
As it stands, the article is in a deplorable state. You are doing everything to ensure that a poorly written article Our Father is the worst article in Wikipedia. What is one phrase in it: "Lutheran theologian Harold Buls suggested that both were original, the Matthean version spoken by Jesus early in his ministry in Galilee, and the Lucan version one year later," very likely in Judea ". Firstly, no one knows the original of the prayer at the present time, secondly, the Greek translations are not original texts, and thirdly, it is just a sick fantasy that has nothing to do with science. And such passages in the article are a dime a dozen. If you like this whole parade of absurdity and nonsense, then this is only your choice. Why should all other readers read all this? And at the same time you do not allow to remove the most obvious bloopers in the article. Censorship, worse than ever. Why include NRSV footnotes in the text itself? Moreover, with the absolutely idiotic phrase "Other ancient authorities". It is useless to discuss the text of the article with you, you have not answered one of my questions. You are doing very badly.Wlbw68 (talk) 23:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
This section is about NRSV. Please, everyone, keep to the topic and don't encourage departures from it by answering remarks on other questions. Bealtainemí (talk) 18:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
Wlbw68, is your argument that the gospels were originally written in Aramaic, that there were physical manuscripts in Aramaic that were later translated into Greek? If that is what your position is, I'll sorry to say, you are not correct on that front. Some oral proto-gospel that was first told in Aramaic, sure. That the Lord's prayer was originally given in Aramaic, (presuming it actually was Jesus that first dictated it, which I think it is probable that it was), undoubtedly so. And you are also correct that neither gospel version can be considered "the original", because both were written independently of the other, and they were different. But a written original gospel in Aramaic, there is no evidence whatsoever that any such thing ever existed. Dont underestimate oral transmission, either. The Iliad and Odyssey were transmitted completely by mouth for centuries before they were ever put in writing; and the Iliad's description of the physical landscape around Troy was found to be accurate to the minute detail. (off the wall example, but hey). Firejuggler86 (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Is there a reason for the mentions of 2 Matthew and 2 Luke? Are these referring to manuscript traditions? If so, that should be footnoted. This is a very unusual convention.
Quarantine Zone (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
@Elizium23: The article doesn’t cite ‘The KJV accepted today’, it explicitly cites ‘King James Version (1611)’. As we are currently presenting it, this label is straightforwardly wrong and misrepresents the cited source; the 1611 version did not use the text given. Either the label should be changed to ‘(modernized)’ or some such, in which case it should be cited to wherever the text is actually taken from (not the 1611 edition), or the text should follow the actual version cited. (Also worth mentioning there is already a modernized version right next to it in any case.) Vorziblix (talk) 21:53, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Should Cristopher Tin's "Baba Yetu" be added to the list of musical renditions of the Lord's Prayer?
It is allegedly a modern choral rendition in the language Swahili, and the list already includes renditions in other languages, such as German.2A01:4F0:4018:F0:BCB7:31AB:E9C4:BE8B (talk) 07:07, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
Why, if Jesus spoke in Aramaic (not Greek, not Latin, certainly not English), is there no direct translation here from the original language to English?I have heard/read several, and they are very interesting. 69.73.78.26 (talk) 10:29, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
It may be of interest to compare with the Jewish prayer Ana b'Koach, which may have originated in the same period, during cruel, pre-christian Roman hegemony and occupation (oppression).JohnEC Jr (talk) 02:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
This seems to be one of the oldest and long-living prayers in the peace story of humanity.JohnEC Jr (talk) 00:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, so why are English translations done in Old English instead of modern English? I would understand if this was a Christian website but for Wikipedia, this should be a factual discussion and not one based on church traditions. 2605:59C8:61BA:6C00:4C6:C3EA:60C0:DD46 (talk) 01:54, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
The part on the Roman Missal states that the 1962 version of the missal spells quotidianum as cotidianum. Does anyone know an example of this? All of the 1962 examples I have seen spell it with a quo as opposed to a co. I was planning on changing it but I wanted to see if someone has an example before I make an edit 108.6.113.97 (talk) 23:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)