Board index ‹ Prayer
10 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Matthew 6:5-15
by One Eye » Wed May 27, 2020 11:38 am
Why is it that people in the churches do not pray the way Jesus taught here? (Matthew 6:5-15)
- One Eye
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by jimwalton » Wed May 27, 2020 11:43 am
My first response is the many Christians in many churches DO pray the way Jesus taught here. Many congregations have a tradition of reciting the Lord's prayer together.
Secondly, though, it is debatable whether Jesus ever intended this to be recited prayer. Notice Jesus said, "This is how you should pray," not "...what you should pray." The elements of the Lord's Prayer are personal worship, a sense of expectation, a mood of submission, the legitimacy of petition, the necessity of confession, the benefits of compassion, and a posture of dependence. Christians pray that way all the time.
We certainly don't believe that the Lord's Prayer was meant to be a ritualistic mantra with some kind of magical powers or a path to spirituality. Remember its immediate context is the avoidance of babbling, excessive wording, and a focus on oneself.
Secondly, though, it is debatable whether Jesus ever intended this to be recited prayer. Notice Jesus said, "This is how you should pray," not "...what you should pray." The elements of the Lord's Prayer are personal worship, a sense of expectation, a mood of submission, the legitimacy of petition, the necessity of confession, the benefits of compassion, and a posture of dependence. Christians pray that way all the time.
We certainly don't believe that the Lord's Prayer was meant to be a ritualistic mantra with some kind of magical powers or a path to spirituality. Remember its immediate context is the avoidance of babbling, excessive wording, and a focus on oneself.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9103
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by West Virginia » Wed May 27, 2020 12:57 pm
> We certainly don't believe that the Lord's Prayer was meant to be a ritualistic mantra with some kind of magical powers or a path to spirituality.
Well that's the problem. We don't believe that today, two thousand years later. But are we in the same exact culture and world-view as the original audience of the saying? We are not. This is the pitfall with deleting the original historical context of Jesus' sayings.
> Notice Jesus said, "This is how you should pray," not "...what you should pray."
Except Luke 11:2-4 has Jesus’ disciples coming up to him asking to be taught the prayer John taught his own disciples. Here we have Jesus’ own disciples asking him not for his own prayer, but the one John taught his disciples and Jesus begins “when you pray, say…” Preserved here is quite possibly the very prayer John taught his disciples and it is of such importance that the disciples of Jesus wish to learn it too.
Well that's the problem. We don't believe that today, two thousand years later. But are we in the same exact culture and world-view as the original audience of the saying? We are not. This is the pitfall with deleting the original historical context of Jesus' sayings.
> Notice Jesus said, "This is how you should pray," not "...what you should pray."
Except Luke 11:2-4 has Jesus’ disciples coming up to him asking to be taught the prayer John taught his own disciples. Here we have Jesus’ own disciples asking him not for his own prayer, but the one John taught his disciples and Jesus begins “when you pray, say…” Preserved here is quite possibly the very prayer John taught his disciples and it is of such importance that the disciples of Jesus wish to learn it too.
- West Virginia
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by jimwalton » Wed May 27, 2020 12:59 pm
> We don't believe that today, two thousand years later. But are we in the same exact culture and world-view as the original audience of the saying? We are not. This is the pitfall with deleting the original historical context of Jesus' sayings.
Then I'd like to see your evidence of the original historical context of the Lord's Prayer being understood as a ritualistic mantra, magically powerful, or a path to spirituality. Something from the 1st century would be helpful.
> Except Luke 11:2-4 has Jesus’ disciples coming up to him asking to be taught the prayer John taught his own disciples.
You've misconstrued Lk. 11.1. Jesus's disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray, since John taught his disciples how to pray. They are not asking to be given the same words. We have no record of any prayer John taught to his followers, but that's not what Jesus's disciples are asking for, in any case.
Disciples commonly asked their teachers for instruction (which was mostly the point of following a teacher). Some teachers were known to have a collection of prayers for various occasions. John's disciples had apparently asked John to teach them to pray, so Jesus's disciples ask Jesus to teach them to pray. There is no notion of them wanting Jesus to teach them the same prayer John taught his disciples.
When Luke writes, "καθὼς καὶ," it shows us that Jesus's disciples want to be taught "just as also" John's disciples wanted to be taught.
Then I'd like to see your evidence of the original historical context of the Lord's Prayer being understood as a ritualistic mantra, magically powerful, or a path to spirituality. Something from the 1st century would be helpful.
> Except Luke 11:2-4 has Jesus’ disciples coming up to him asking to be taught the prayer John taught his own disciples.
You've misconstrued Lk. 11.1. Jesus's disciples asked Jesus to teach them to pray, since John taught his disciples how to pray. They are not asking to be given the same words. We have no record of any prayer John taught to his followers, but that's not what Jesus's disciples are asking for, in any case.
Disciples commonly asked their teachers for instruction (which was mostly the point of following a teacher). Some teachers were known to have a collection of prayers for various occasions. John's disciples had apparently asked John to teach them to pray, so Jesus's disciples ask Jesus to teach them to pray. There is no notion of them wanting Jesus to teach them the same prayer John taught his disciples.
When Luke writes, "καθὼς καὶ," it shows us that Jesus's disciples want to be taught "just as also" John's disciples wanted to be taught.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9103
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by West Virginia » Wed May 27, 2020 3:12 pm
> Secondly, though, it is debatable whether Jesus ever intended this to be recited prayer.
Yet gLuke specifically says “When you pray, say:”
> Then I'd like to see your evidence of the original historical context of the Lord's Prayer being understood as a ritualistic mantra, magically powerful, or a path to spirituality. Something from the 1st century would be helpful.
Its relation to the daily shema, for example.
Yet gLuke specifically says “When you pray, say:”
> Then I'd like to see your evidence of the original historical context of the Lord's Prayer being understood as a ritualistic mantra, magically powerful, or a path to spirituality. Something from the 1st century would be helpful.
Its relation to the daily shema, for example.
- West Virginia
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by jimwalton » Wed May 27, 2020 3:13 pm
> Yet gLuke specifically says “When you pray, say:”
Yes, he did. What has to be interpreted is if Jesus was instituting a recitation or a model. If we look at the Bible, there is no other occasion in all of Scripture that a prayer was to be used recitatively, despite all the recorded prayers in Scripture. It's difficult to discern Jesus's intent. To me the weight of argument is that he is teaching them to pray, not giving them a prayer to recite.
> Its relation to the daily shema, for example.
This doesn't fulfill the weight of evidence. If it is going to do that, you need to show me any relationship the apostles, the early Christians, or the early Christian church made between the daily shema and the Lord's Prayer. What evidence do you have?
Yes, he did. What has to be interpreted is if Jesus was instituting a recitation or a model. If we look at the Bible, there is no other occasion in all of Scripture that a prayer was to be used recitatively, despite all the recorded prayers in Scripture. It's difficult to discern Jesus's intent. To me the weight of argument is that he is teaching them to pray, not giving them a prayer to recite.
> Its relation to the daily shema, for example.
This doesn't fulfill the weight of evidence. If it is going to do that, you need to show me any relationship the apostles, the early Christians, or the early Christian church made between the daily shema and the Lord's Prayer. What evidence do you have?
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9103
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by West Virginia » Wed May 27, 2020 5:38 pm
> Yes, he did. What has to be interpreted is
Nope. Nothing “has to be interpreted” here. The text says what it says. That it's inconvenient for you, a modern Christian of a narrow denomination, doesn't mean you get to “interpret away” what the text actually says.
To reiterate for anyone reading: Notice how he rejects here the underlying grammar, but earlier he flees to underlying grammar when nit-picking "“καθὼς καὶ.”
> This doesn't fulfill the weight of evidence... What evidence do you have?
I love the extreme interpretational skepticism in one area coupled with your extreme interpretational credulity above. We have another prayer, the Eucharist, which also fulfills the expectations of a daily, ritualistic, mantra-like prayer, much like the Lord's Prayer or the Shema would have been. But okay, lets forget the allusions to the Shema and the Eucharist. The Didache itself prescribes the Lord's Prayer be said three times a day:
And just to preempt the obvious response that Didache is “too late” (LOL@ late 1st century—early 2nd century being “too late,”) Jonathan Draper writes (Gospel Perspectives, v. 5, p. 269):
Nope. Nothing “has to be interpreted” here. The text says what it says. That it's inconvenient for you, a modern Christian of a narrow denomination, doesn't mean you get to “interpret away” what the text actually says.
To reiterate for anyone reading: Notice how he rejects here the underlying grammar, but earlier he flees to underlying grammar when nit-picking "“καθὼς καὶ.”
> This doesn't fulfill the weight of evidence... What evidence do you have?
I love the extreme interpretational skepticism in one area coupled with your extreme interpretational credulity above. We have another prayer, the Eucharist, which also fulfills the expectations of a daily, ritualistic, mantra-like prayer, much like the Lord's Prayer or the Shema would have been. But okay, lets forget the allusions to the Shema and the Eucharist. The Didache itself prescribes the Lord's Prayer be said three times a day:
Chapter 8. Fasting and Prayer (the Lord's Prayer). But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week. Rather, fast on the fourth day and the Preparation (Friday). Do not pray like the hypocrites, but rather as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, like this:
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 today our daily (needful) bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (or, evil); for Thine is the power and the glory for ever..
Pray this three times each day.
And just to preempt the obvious response that Didache is “too late” (LOL@ late 1st century—early 2nd century being “too late,”) Jonathan Draper writes (Gospel Perspectives, v. 5, p. 269):
... the picture of the Church which it presents could only be described as primitive, reaching back to the very earliest stages of the Church's order and practice in a way which largely agrees with the picture presented by the NT, while at the same time posing questions for many traditional interpretations of this first period of the Church's life.
- West Virginia
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by jimwalton » Wed May 27, 2020 5:53 pm
> Nope. Nothing “has to be interpreted” here. The text says what it says.
Every communication has to be interpreted. It's the nature of communication. Communication theory postulates the locution, the illocution, and the perlocution.
If you just want to take the simplest, most superficial look at what Jesus said, his disciples asked him to teach them to pray, and he did. He taught them how. He was not, therefore, giving them a recitation, but teaching them how to pray.
> Notice how he rejects here the underlying grammar, but earlier he flees to underlying grammar when nit-picking "“καθὼς καὶ.”
I have not rejected the underlying grammar. If you want to delve into it, we can.
in Matthew 6.9, the phrase is Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς. Strictly translating, it read, "Therefore so you pray." The present imperative of "pray" is the mood of volition, expressing intention. "Therefore so (Οὕτως: in this manner) you should will to pray." It's an injunction of how one should pray, not what one should pray.
Luke's iteration is slightly different but giving the same thrust. The disciples ask, "Teach us to pray" (δίδαξον ἡμᾶς προσεύχεσθαι), a simple aorist denoting action as simply occurring, without reference to any progress or repetition.
And then he says, "just as also; in the same manner as" (καθὼς καὶ)
"John taught his disciples" (Ἰωάνης ἐδίδαξεν τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ). Here "taught" is another simple aorist indicative, simply presenting the action as having been attained.
So what underlying grammar have I neglected, and what of my explication would you like to discuss?
> that it's inconvenient for you,
Actually, there's nothing inconvenient here for me. I'm perfectly comfortable with what Jesus says and what He meant by it.
> I love the extreme interpretational skepticism in one area coupled with your extreme interpretational credulity above.
What's up with the mood, huh? Dial down the deprecating rhetoric and let's just talk, OK?
> We have another prayer, the Eucharist
Who's "we," and what is the source of this Eucharistic prayer? Is it in the Bible? Give me a verse, and we can discuss it.
> The Didache itself prescribes the Lord's Prayer be said three times a day:
OK, thank you for this reference. It's stuff like this I was asking for.
> Jonathan Draper
Draper extrapolates that the Didache is referencing an earlier tradition, which is possible. There's no way to confirm this Scripturally, as we have writings extending from Paul (mid-50s) to Revelation (mid-90s) with nary a reference to any Christian group praying the Lord's Prayer in ritualistic or repetitive or any other manner.
Obviously fasting was part of early Christian tradition (Acts 13.2; 14.23), but there's no NT teaching about fasting on particular days. Where the practice of praying the Lord's prayer 3 times a day began, I couldn't tell you, but it's not in the Bible. This practice was obviously added later.
More to the point is how utter anti-sacramental Jesus and Paul set up the Church to be. No priesthood (we're all priests), no temple (we're all the temple), no law (we live by grace), and the only rituals given to us are the ordinances of Eucharist and baptism, and our only head is Christ. The original Christianity was religionless. The point was not the have particular officers with sacramental power (the NT gives no such offices or such power), but a group of people together who embody Jesus on Earth, with elders for guidance and Jesus alone as having sacramental authority (the only one who can confer salvific grace).
Every communication has to be interpreted. It's the nature of communication. Communication theory postulates the locution, the illocution, and the perlocution.
If you just want to take the simplest, most superficial look at what Jesus said, his disciples asked him to teach them to pray, and he did. He taught them how. He was not, therefore, giving them a recitation, but teaching them how to pray.
> Notice how he rejects here the underlying grammar, but earlier he flees to underlying grammar when nit-picking "“καθὼς καὶ.”
I have not rejected the underlying grammar. If you want to delve into it, we can.
in Matthew 6.9, the phrase is Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς. Strictly translating, it read, "Therefore so you pray." The present imperative of "pray" is the mood of volition, expressing intention. "Therefore so (Οὕτως: in this manner) you should will to pray." It's an injunction of how one should pray, not what one should pray.
Luke's iteration is slightly different but giving the same thrust. The disciples ask, "Teach us to pray" (δίδαξον ἡμᾶς προσεύχεσθαι), a simple aorist denoting action as simply occurring, without reference to any progress or repetition.
And then he says, "just as also; in the same manner as" (καθὼς καὶ)
"John taught his disciples" (Ἰωάνης ἐδίδαξεν τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ). Here "taught" is another simple aorist indicative, simply presenting the action as having been attained.
So what underlying grammar have I neglected, and what of my explication would you like to discuss?
> that it's inconvenient for you,
Actually, there's nothing inconvenient here for me. I'm perfectly comfortable with what Jesus says and what He meant by it.
> I love the extreme interpretational skepticism in one area coupled with your extreme interpretational credulity above.
What's up with the mood, huh? Dial down the deprecating rhetoric and let's just talk, OK?
> We have another prayer, the Eucharist
Who's "we," and what is the source of this Eucharistic prayer? Is it in the Bible? Give me a verse, and we can discuss it.
> The Didache itself prescribes the Lord's Prayer be said three times a day:
OK, thank you for this reference. It's stuff like this I was asking for.
> Jonathan Draper
Draper extrapolates that the Didache is referencing an earlier tradition, which is possible. There's no way to confirm this Scripturally, as we have writings extending from Paul (mid-50s) to Revelation (mid-90s) with nary a reference to any Christian group praying the Lord's Prayer in ritualistic or repetitive or any other manner.
Obviously fasting was part of early Christian tradition (Acts 13.2; 14.23), but there's no NT teaching about fasting on particular days. Where the practice of praying the Lord's prayer 3 times a day began, I couldn't tell you, but it's not in the Bible. This practice was obviously added later.
More to the point is how utter anti-sacramental Jesus and Paul set up the Church to be. No priesthood (we're all priests), no temple (we're all the temple), no law (we live by grace), and the only rituals given to us are the ordinances of Eucharist and baptism, and our only head is Christ. The original Christianity was religionless. The point was not the have particular officers with sacramental power (the NT gives no such offices or such power), but a group of people together who embody Jesus on Earth, with elders for guidance and Jesus alone as having sacramental authority (the only one who can confer salvific grace).
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9103
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by West Virginia » Thu May 28, 2020 1:02 pm
what is the source of this Eucharistic prayer? Is it in the Bible? Give me a verse, and we can discuss it.
1 Cor. 11:23-26
Didache 9:1-9
Mt. 26:17–30
Mk. 14:12–26
Lk. 22:7–39
Jn. 13:1–17:26
1 Cor. 11:23-26
Didache 9:1-9
Mt. 26:17–30
Mk. 14:12–26
Lk. 22:7–39
Jn. 13:1–17:26
- West Virginia
Re: Matthew 6:5-15
by jimwalton » Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:49 am
Great. thanks. Now we can talk about them.
So I don't know what you want to discuss here. The "Eucharistic Prayer" is not a biblical prayer, but one of early Christian tradition. So it seems that the Scripture is the source for neither the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer or any use of the Eucharistic prayer. The source for both of those is the Didache, which was never a consideration for canonization, though it seems to have been approved by the Church as worthwhile reading.
- 1 Cor. 11.23-26: There is no prayer in this text.
- The Didache: Yes, there is a prayer in here, but this is not Scripture. Obviously it was traditionally recited in some contexts, but how many cannot be known.
- Mt. 26.17-20. There is no prayer in this text.
- Mk. 14.12-26: There is no prayer in this text.
- Lk. 22.7-39: There is no prayer in this text.
- Jn. 13.1-17.26: Jesus undoubtedly prays Jn. 17, but it's not a Eucharistic prayer.
So I don't know what you want to discuss here. The "Eucharistic Prayer" is not a biblical prayer, but one of early Christian tradition. So it seems that the Scripture is the source for neither the daily recitation of the Lord's Prayer or any use of the Eucharistic prayer. The source for both of those is the Didache, which was never a consideration for canonization, though it seems to have been approved by the Church as worthwhile reading.
Last bumped by Anonymous on Sat Nov 19, 2022 9:49 am.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9103
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
10 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest