Change in the Lords Prayer?

Discussion in 'New Testament' started by Joe, Sep 7, 2017.

  1. Joe is a Verified MemberJoe Tattooed Theist

    Administrator Site Supporter

    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Open Theist
    Matthew 6:9-13

    A user on my Instagram sent me this, there seem to be many claims that scripture has been physically changed within peoples personal bibles...

    I'm not sure how I feel about it, seems like another odd claim, but have any of you guys heard or read about this?

    Always fun stuff to hear and think about :p
  2. Illuminator is a Verified MemberIlluminator Moderator


    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    #2 Illuminator is a Verified MemberIlluminator, Sep 11, 2017
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2017
    I prefer text over videos. I can't hear the scratchy sound. I think you mean the doxology "For thine is the kingdom..." that may or may not follow Mat. 6:9-3

    The "For thine..." is technically termed a doxology. In the Bible, we find the practice of concluding prayers with a short, hymn-like verse which exalts the glory of God. An example similar to the doxology in question is found in David's prayer located in 1 Chronicles 29:10-13 of the Old Testament. The Jews frequently used these doxologies to conclude prayers at the time of Our Lord.

    In the early Church, the Christians living in the eastern half of the Roman Empire added the doxology "for thine..." to the Gospel text of the Our Father when reciting the prayer at Mass. Evidence of this practice is also found in the "Didache" (Teaching of the Twelve Apostles), a first century manual of morals, worship and doctrine of the Church. Also, when copying the Scriptures, Greek scribes sometimes appended the doxology onto the original Gospel text of the Our Father, however, most texts today would omit this inclusion, relegate it to a footnote, or note that it was a later addition to the Gospel. Official "Catholic" Bibles including the Vulgate, the Douay-Rheims, the Confraternity Edition, and the New American have never included this doxology.

    In the western half of the Roman Empire and in the Latin rite, we see the importance of the Our Father at Mass. St. Jerome (d. 420) attested to the usage of the Our Father in the Mass, and St. Gregory the Great (d. 604) placed the recitation of the Our Father after the Canon and before the Fraction. The Commentary on the Sacrament of St. Ambrose (d.397) meditates on the meaning of "daily bread" in the context of the Holy Eucharist. In this same vein, St. Augustine, (d. 430) saw the Our Father as a beautiful connection of the Holy Eucharist with the forgiveness of sins. In all instances, the Church saw this perfect prayer which our Lord gave to us as a proper means of preparing for holy Communion. However, none of this evidence includes the doxology.

    Interestingly, the English wording of the Our Father that we use today reflects the version mandated for use by Henry VIII (while still in communion with the Catholic Church), which was based on the English version of the Bible produced by Tyndale (1525). Later in 1541 (after his official separation from the Holy Father), Henry VIII issued an edict saying, " His Grace perceiving now the great diversity of the translations (of the Pater noster etc.) hath caused an uniform translation of the said Pater Noster, Ave, Creed, etc., to be set forth, willing all his loving subjects to learn and use the same and straitly (sic) commanding all parsons, vicars and curates to read and teach the same to their parishioners."

    This English version without the doxology of the Our Father became accepted throughout the English speaking world, even though the later English translations of the Bible, including the Catholic Douay-Rheims (1610) and Protestant King James versions (1611), had different renderings of prayers as found in the Gospel of St. Matthew.

    Later, the Catholic Church made slight modifications in the English: "who art replaced "which art," and "on earth" replaced "in earth." During the reign of Edward VI, the Book of Common Prayer (1549 and 1552 editions) of the Church of England did not change the wording of the Our Father nor add the doxology. However, during the reign of Elizabeth I and a resurgence to rid the Church of England from any Catholic vestiges, the Lord's Prayer was changed to include the doxology.

    The irony of this answer is that some Protestants sometimes accuse Catholics of not being "literally" faithful to Sacred Scripture and depending too much on tradition. In this case, we see that the Catholic Church has been faithful to the Gospel text of the Our Father, while Protestant Churches have added something of tradition to the word of Jesus.

    Mr. Bean is wrong.

    (It's a silly beef because the doxology is part of the Liturgy anyway, recited shortly after the Lord's Prayer.)
  3. Illuminator is a Verified MemberIlluminator Moderator


    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Bible translators use two methods to render the sacred text into English: literal equivalence (also called formal or complete equivalence) and dynamic equivalence.

    Literal equivalence translations try to give as literal a translation of the original text as possible. Translators using this method try to stick close to the original texts, even preserving much of the original word order.

    The disadvantage of literal translations is that they are harder to read because Hebrew and Greek style intrudes into the English text. Compare the following renderings of Leviticus 18:6-10 from the Protestant New American Standard Bible (NAS), a literal translation, and the Catholic New American Bible (NAB), a dynamic translation: ...example follows

    Since literal translations can be difficult to read, translators have produced more readable Bibles by employing the dynamic equivalence method. According to this method, it does not matter whether the grammar and word order of the original are preserved in English, so long as the meaning of the text is preserved. This frees up the translator to use modern English style and diction.

    In the above example, the translators of the NAB replaced the obscure Hebrew idiom "uncover the nakedness of" with the more readable "have sexual intercourse with."

    There is a price to pay for readability, though. Dynamic translations can lack precision because they sometimes omit subtle cues to the meaning of a passage; these clues may be preserved in literal translations. Dynamic translations also run a greater risk of having the translators' doctrinal views read into the text through the greater liberty of the translating method.

    For instance, dynamic Protestant translations such as the New International Version (NIV) tend to translate the Greek word ergon and its derivatives as "work" when "work" reinforces Protestant doctrine, but as something else (such as "deeds" or "doing") when "work" would serve Catholic doctrine.

    The NIV renders Romans 4:2, "If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works [ergon], he had something to boast about--but not before God." This passage is used to support the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone. But the NIV translates the erg- derivatives in Romans 2:6-7 differently: "God `will give to each person according to what he has done [erga].' To those who by persistence in doing [ergou] good seek glory, honor, and immortality, he will give eternal life."

    If the erg- derivatives were translated consistently as "work-" then it would be clear that the passage says God will judge "every person according to his works" and will give eternal life to those who seek immortality "by persistence in working good"--statements which support the Catholic view of salvation.

    Even when there is no doctrinal agenda involved, it is difficult to do word studies in dynamic translations because of less consistency in how words are rendered. Consider these NIV renderings:

    "Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God . . (Rom. 2:17);

    "You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?" (Rom. 2:23).

    The Greek word translated "brag" is kauchaomai, but when the same term appears in Romans 5:11 it is rendered differently:

    "Not only is this so, but we also rejoice [kauchomenoi] in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation."

    Because the term is translated in different ways the reader misses an important.aspect of what Paul is saying. It would be better to better to translate the term as "boast" in both cases (as the New American Bible does). This would make Paul's thought clear to the reader. There is nothing intrinsically wrong in boasting about God. Both Jews and Christians do it (Rom. 2:17, 5:11a). Understood in this sense, it is not bragging about how good you are, but praising God by proclaiming what he has done for you. While Jews boast of having a relationship to God through the Mosaic Law (Rom. 2:23), Christians boast of the relationship God has given them through Christ (Rom. 5:11b). All this is lost if the word kauchaomai is rendered differently in the two passages, and this illustrates why literal translations are better for serious Bible study.

    A second question you will need to ask yourself is whether you want an old or a modern translation. Old versions, such as the King James and the Douay-Rheims, sound more dignified, authoritative, and inspiring, but they are much harder to understand because English has changed in the almost four hundred years since they were made.

    The bottom line: Which is the best version for you? A possibly apocryphal anecdote about Billy Graham has the answer. When asked which Bible version is the best, he replied,
    "The one you will read."

    for further analysis of Bible translations, see the full context:

    I don't think Mr. Bean takes any of this into consideration.
  4. Seems as likely as faith healer visiting a hospital to clear the wards!
  5. That's an interesting piece, sadly though it seems to be driven/ motivated by a sense of justifying a certain doctrinal basis. If we criticize a Bible translation because it doesn't support our doctrinal position (as this piece does with the NIV) then aren't we allowing tradition to trump the text and drive our choice of text?

    Personally I want to know what the text of scripture actually says, by that I mean I want to know what God has said and if that clashes with my theology then it is my theology that needs to change and not my bible version.
  6. Illuminator is a Verified MemberIlluminator Moderator


    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    I took an impartial view for both sides:
    The NIV renders Romans 4:2, "If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works [ergon], he had something to boast about--but not before God." This passage is used to support the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone.

    If the erg- derivatives were translated consistently as "work-" then it would be clear that the passage says God will judge "every person according to his works" and will give eternal life to those who seek immortality "by persistence in working good"--statements which support the Catholic view of salvation.

    "seems to be driven/ motivated by a sense of justifying a certain doctrinal basis." Is false, as demonstrated.

    It doesn't matter what version you use, you will carry in your own biases as we all do.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Anthony D'Arienzo is a Verified MemberAnthony D'Arienzo Well-Known Member
    Anthony D'Arienzo

    Member BANNED

    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    He is a lot easier to answer when he's not here.
    Anyone judged by their Works will perish.
  8. Jonathan Member


    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Indeed, yet this is how we will be judged. We ought, therefore, to "work out our salvation with fear and trembling". God is both perfect Love and Justice.


    2 Corinthians 5:10 - For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

    1 Corinthians 4:5 - Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men's hearts; and then each man's praise will come to him from God.

    1 Peter 1:17 - If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth;

    Revelation 20:12 - And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.

    Psalm 62:12 - And lovingkindness is Yours, O Lord, For You recompense a man according to his work.

    Proverbs 24:12 - If you say, "See, we did not know this," Does He not consider it who weighs the hearts? And does He not know it who keeps your soul? And will He not render to man according to his work?

    Colossians 3:25 - For he who does wrong will receive the consequences of the wrong which he has done, and that without partiality.

    Proverbs 11:31 - If the righteous will be rewarded in the earth, How much more the wicked and the sinner!

    1 Corinthians 3:8 - Now he who plants and he who waters are one; but each will receive his own reward according to his own labor.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  9. Mungo is a Verified MemberMungo Well-Known Member


    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    I think these controversies over works arise because we do not define what we mean by works

    The Concise Oxford English Dictionary gives several definitions of work. The first and most general is:
    “activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a result.”

    By this definition “believing” and “confessing with the lips” is work. Therefore Protestants believe in “salvation by works”. Of course they deny it – but then Catholics also deny they believe in “salvation by works”. Instead of throwing slogans around we need to look at what scripture says about this.

    St. Paul’s writes much about salvation (justification) and works in his letter to the Romans. A key text is Rom 3:19-28, and a key phrase that Paul uses in this is “works of the law
    20 For no human being will be justified in his sight by works of the law, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

    28 For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.
    (He also uses the phrase works of the law in Gal 2:1, 3:2, 5 & 10)

    This implies that Paul recognises two classes of “works” – works of the law and works that are not works of the law. We’ll come to the latter later. But let us concentrate on what Paul means by works of the law.

    In Romans 2 he writes
    25 Circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision.

    And in Gal 3:10
    For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed be every one who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, and do them."

    Clearly by works of the law Paul is referring to the Jewish law.

    The Concise Oxford English Dictionary helpfully gives a definition of this class of works - “such activity as a means of earning income”.

    It is in this sense of earning something that Paul uses the word in Rom 4:4 when he writes:
    “Now to one who works, his wages are not reckoned as a gift but as his due.” (Rom 4:4)

    Works done under the law are those done under some sort of legal contract that try to put an obligation on God – to make salvation our due. We try to earn our salvation

    If we work, as for an employer, expecting wages as our due then we will be judged under that Law and will always be found wanting and will be condemned.

    That is why we can only receive salvation as a gift. It cannot be earned.
    “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

    There is another class of works – works that are not works of the law.

    The third definition in Concise Oxford English Dictionary is helpful here – Theology, good or moral deeds”

    Doing “good works” give us merit in the sight of God because they are done out of love and do not attempt to put God under any obligation to reward us.

    One definition of merit from the Collins Concise English Dictionary is:
    a deserving or commendable quality or act.”

    Note: in Catholic theology, merit means rewardable. It does not imply earn. Perhaps if we used the term "rewardable deeds" rather than "good works" it might be clearer.

    When we do something out of love and not as a contract under Law we do a deserving or commendable act and God will graciously reward us.
    love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High” (Lk 6:35)

    I the Lord search the mind and try the heart, to give to every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings.” (Jer 17:10)

    Whoever does good has his reward, which each receives according to his deeds.”(Sir 16:14)

    We could give examples of these three definitions of work as follows:

    1. – Digging my garden (general definition).

    2. – Digging someone else’s garden for a wage (work as earning income)

    3. – Digging an elderly neighbour’s garden out of charity (work as a good deed and meritorious – a commendable act)

    Paul writes: “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God; it is not from works, so no one may boast”. (Eph 2:8-9)

    Whereas James writes: “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?” (Jas 2:14)

    These two are not contradictory if we understand that Paul is referring to works of the law and James is referring to good deeds, meritorious acts, rewardable deeds, just as in the examples he gives in the following verses:

    “If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?”

    These are the type of works Jesus refers to in Mt 25:31-45 and Mt 10:41-42

    Further, from my examples of digging a garden we can see that it is not the act itself that is good or bad but the cause of the act, the motive. If the act is motivated by love then it is meritorious and God will reward us. If it is driven by other motives (e.g. to get admiration from others) then we may get no reward, at least from God.

    “Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them; for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven…….” (Mt 6:1 & following verses)

    Finally whatever good acts we do are God’s actions in us not just our own. Catholics believe that grace comes in two kinds, sanctifying grace and actual grace. Actual grace is the prompts and help that God gives us to do good deeds. When we do a good deed it is God working in us.

    Or, as St. Augustine said "when you crown our merits, you crown your own gifts,"
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1

Share This Page