Tell us how we should pray

Old Testament allusions within the Lucan Lord’s Prayer and theirimplications for ministry

BIST 6400, The Christian and Old Testament Theology, Fall 2013

Dane Leitch

11/15/2013

Tell us how we should pray.With these words the disciples present to Jesus a request

for spiritual clarity. Despite following him in his ministry the

apostles still felt as though they were missing important

instruction. This prayer would have ramifications far beyond the

spiritual lives of twelve men living at the front end of a new

era. The ‘Our Father’ would become a powerful prayer in many

traditions and shape the manner in which men and women have

prayed for centuries. In They Cried to the Lord great authority is

recognized in this teaching. “Nothing is more central to the New

Testament witness concerning prayer than that brief prayer that

Jesus taught his disciples when asked by them to do so.”1 Such

great authority is what is enticing in the study of this prayer

as it is built on an Old Testament foundation and Old Testament

theology, yet retains vast importance for the faithful today.

Jesus is the ultimate exemplar for ministry and teaching, but so 1 Patrick D. Miller, They Cried to the Lord: the Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer

(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), loc 5130, Kindle Edition. I checked citation of digital media and this seems to be the preferred method according to Turabian volume 8, “loc” is used to indicate location rather than page.

1

too do modern ministers find themselves being asked that very

same question. “Pastor, teach me how to pray.” As will be

detailed in this paper, Jesus did not make up an answer on the

spot but pulled together theology from the Scriptures of his day

in order to articulate a response. The answer which was given was

not devoid of context, but steeped in tradition. Prayer, as

taught by Jesus to his disciples, outlines a New Testament

interpretation of an Old Testament expression of prayer and

faith. This familiar form grants modern ministers the very same

latitude to construct answers and meaning from the Old Testament.

As the study unfolds, a dialogue with Miller’s work on this topic

will emerge.

Above all else, this study both relies on and recognizes

continuity between the Old and New Testaments. Miller chose a

particularly powerful subtitle to chapter ten of They Cried to the

Lord, “the further witness of the New Testament.”2 Without

acknowledging the presence of continuity it is too tempting to

couch modern theology with too much emphasis on one testament and

not enough on the other. It is not the task of this paper to

2 Miller, loc 4743.

2

explain the continuity. Instead this is accepted as an a priori

point evident in the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the

Four Evangelists. When addressing prayer it is important to note

that “While there is far more prayer and reporting of people

praying, as individuals or as community, in the Old Testament,

there is little, if any, instruction in prayer.”3 This powerful

statement is informative for addressing the hypothetical

parishioner above. If a theology of prayer is to emerge it must

do so while addressing each testament. For this reason it is

helpful to see how Jesus teaches using Old Testament ideas, but

brings it to his audience in a way they can hear and apply. This

method should be recognized when addressing the significance and

use of the Old Testament in ministry when teaching on prayer.

Tell us which prayer we should pray.As the exploration of the Lord’s Prayer begins it is

immediately obvious that the two records of this prayer do not

align. The Lord’s Prayer is recorded in two Gospels in two

differing forms. These two forms are presented side by side for

3 Ibid, loc 4790.

3

ease of comparison. 4 A number of obvious differences can be

observed with a surface reading. Before choosing a base prayer

for this study, understanding their differences helps highlight

the importance of focusing on one form. Written out below are the

two prayers in their entirety. Exclusions are indicated by using

hyphens paired with underlining. Bolding indicates use of

significantly different words.

4 All New Testament verses will be from the NRSV unless otherwise indicated. Old Testament verses quoted in the text will be the author’s own translation.

4

A glaring preliminary difference can be seen in the loss of

the word “our” before “Father.” Although this does step slightly

away from the communal voice of the common plural, it retains the

intimacy of the term. Changing voice from corporate individual

does not detract from the actual issue. “The issue here is the

intimate, caring, relational image of a parent.”5 Dropping the

5 Miller, loc 5155.

5

Matthew 6:9-13

Pray then in this way:

Our Father in heaven,

hallowed be your name.

Your kingdom come.

Your will be done, on

earth as it is in

heaven.

Give us this day our

daily bread.

And forgive us our

debts,

Luke 11:2-4

When you pray, say:

--- Father-----------,

hallowed be your name.

Your kingdom come.

-------------------------

----------------------

---------

Give us each day our daily

bread.

And forgive us our

sins,

corporate aspect has no great bearing on the intention of the

prayer, nor does it distract from the study of the Old Testament

roots of this prayer. In that same way the clarification of God’s

dwelling place in heaven can be dismissed. Both are superfluous

as they are subsumed in the initial identifying term “Father” as

will be shown in the research below.

What could be assigned importance is the order and presence

of “hallowed be your name,” “kingdom come,” and “will be done.”6

Although Miller emphasizes the role these terms play in his study

of this prayer, one is missing from the Lucan account. In his

research, Miller suggests that personal petitions should only be

brought to God after acknowledging a desire to fulfill God’s will

and purpose.7 Miller goes so far as to elevate the prayer that

God’s will be done to paradigm status. “In the New Testament, we

begin to encounter the prayer for help that clearly subordinates

the present trouble of the one who prays to the will of God.”8

What is troubling to the reader is that if this phrase is so

vital, why is it missing from the other prayer? In Luke, the

6 Miller, loc 5179.7 Ibid.8 Ibid, loc 5021.

6

first two phrases could be praise refrains, while the request

that God’s will be done is completely absent. Its absence could

suggest lesser importance to the vocalization of that request or

it could even point to a combining of the first two terms in

which God’s name is being called holy because God’s kingdom has

come. Much like the first difference, this one is also able to be

explained through the Old Testament lens.

The final difference between these texts is a last

exclusion. In Matthew the prayer requests deliverance from the

evil one. Traditionally assumed to be Satan, the phrase fits well

with the request to be kept from the “time of trial.” Luke does

not make such a request as it would simply be inappropriate to do

so. In Luke’s theology the one who brings the time of trial seems

to be God rather than some evil force. This interpretation is in

line with the Old Testament teachings on testing which will also

be explored in greater detail below.9 These differences help to

9 At this point I realize that I have made three distinct promises. 1 – I will show how “Father” in Luke encompasses the entire line in the Matthean account. 2 – I will show how the Old Testament could see the hallowing of God’s name being tied to the coming of God’s kingdom. 3 – I will show that testing is understood in the Old Testament as being under the purview of God, therefore making the protection from the evil one independent from that term.

7

inform the overall direction of this exploration, but do not

clearly indicate which should be used as the base.

Tell us which prayer we should study.A very brief look at the context of the prayer will finalize

which is more appropriate for a study of the Old Testament impact

on prayer in a ministry setting. The contexts of these two

prayers differ so much so that it would seem they are two

separate teachings on the same topic rather than two recordings

of the same message. Broadly speaking, Matthew couches his record

of this teaching amongst the teachings in the Sermon on the Mount

(Mat 5-7). More specifically this explanation of how to pray is

given following the negative example of prayers of hypocrites and

Gentiles (Mat 6:1-8). Luke, on the other hand, places the

teaching in a much more intimate setting in which Jesus himself

is already in prayer (Luke 11:1ff). Following this general

context a closer look at each setting helps guide us to Luke’s

account as the less glossed and therefore more appropriate

version for study.

“It is not surprising, therefore, that the New Testament

instruction about prayer should place some weight upon

8

forgiveness and the prayer of forgiveness. That is the context in

which Matthew places the Lord’s Prayer.”10 Miller identifies

Matthew’s purpose of including this prayer as a way to guide

readers out of the sinfulness of hypocrites and into a more pure

expression of reliance on God. If this is indeed Matthew’s

purpose it could explain some of the extra phrases which could be

read as strengthening reliance on God’s will over human will. In

this context the teaching of Jesus is a call for brief, simple,

and private prayers rather than flamboyant public displays of

piety.11 This context helps to paint a picture of prayer in which

the person praying has “confidence that God will hear and

respond.”12 Matthew uses the prayer in a way to explain

interactions with one another as well as interactions with God.

Avoiding pageantry and expressing dependence on God are the cores

of the context of the prayer in Matthew.

Luke couches the prayer in a very different location and

with a very different purpose. The titular question of this paper

is drawn from the prompting of the disciples, a question absent

10 Miller, loc 4816.11 Ibid.12 Miller, loc 4816.

9

from Matthew’s version. While Matthew has the Lord’s Prayer as a

counter teaching to what has been observed, Luke places it in a

highly personal and deeply intimate small group interaction.

While the call to ask in confidence is also present in Luke it is

closely tied to persistence. “[T]he Lucan parallel to Matt 7:7-11

with its transitional ‘So I say to you’ continues the important

Lucan theme of persistence in prayer that is the subject of the

immediately preceding pericope.”13 For Luke, the importance of

personal interaction with God is emphasized. “There is a further

theme in the teaching of Jesus, especially as it is found in

Luke’s Gospel… it is a note that we have not really heard

heretofore as teaching, but we have encountered it in practice

throughout the Old Testament… This recurring theme is the

exhortation to importunate, persistent prayer.”14 Miller recognizes what

is especially true of Luke’s version of the Lord’s Prayer; there

is a dependence on the Old Testament in Jesus’ teaching.

For three specific reasons Luke’s version will be taken as

normative and foundational for this study. First, much like the

presented ministry challenge of addressing the question of a

13 Ibid, loc 4842.14 Ibid, loc 4854. Emphasis original to Miller.

10

parishioner, Jesus is responding directly to his disciples’

request that they be taught how to prayer. In the development of

a ministry model reflecting Old Testament influence it is

appropriate to mimic Jesus who used this very same method.

Second, the connection expressed by Miller between themes in Luke

and themes of the Old Testament is helpful. Although Matthew also

has many of these same connection Luke’s Gospel could be

considered to apply a broader swath of Scripture. Matthew uses an

Old Testament quote forty-three times from fourteen different

books. More notably than that, however, is that twenty-nine more

than two thirds are out of the Pentateuch. Luke uses more Old

Testament quotes, fifty-seven also from fourteen different books.

Important for comparison is that out of those fifty-seven

quotations only nineteen, exactly one third, are from the

Pentateuch. Luke expresses greater interest in a wider picture of

the Old Testament. A final reason that Luke’s account will be

used is that “Matthew’s prayer as a whole is more eschatological

in orientation, Luke’s more immediate.”15 The concern of this

15 Michael P. Knowles, "Once more 'lead us not eis peirasmon'." Expository Times 115, no. 6 (March 1, 2004): 191-194. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed November 7, 2013).

11

study is for addressing a concern in the present, not one in the

future, therefore the immediacy is a valuable attribute of the

prayer. These three factors explain why the Lucan Lord’s Prayer

is considered the baseline.

Tell us which words we should study.Now that Luke’s prayer has been determined the baseline

prayer to help guide a ministry response to prayer a closer look

at the roots of that prayer are helpful. Jesus taught using the

traditions and Scriptures available to him. While it may be

somewhat romantic to imagine Jesus to have spoken with a Divine

authority fully outside the text, that is not the case. Every

line of the Lucan Lord’s Prayer is planted in the rich soil of

the Old Testament. In some cases the words are identical to Old

Testament models of prayer. In other cases a theological

statement may be the point of Jesus’ divergence from the text.

As with many such explorations it is valuable to start with the

first word and work onward.

FatherThe typical Old Testament form used to address God is some

variation of “My God.” More than one hundred thirty-one instances

12

of “my God,” one hundred eighty-one “our God,” and one hundred

forty-one uses of “my Lord” some of which are references to a

human rather than God. Conservatively there are three hundred

fifty prayers which contain this sort of identifier for God. That

is not to say “Father” is not used. While the aforementioned

reverences are too many to cite every instance the times in which

“Father” is preferred are easier to count and categorize. There

are eight Old Testament passages in which indirect fatherhood is

identified. That is to say the verse indicates that Israel is

God’s son in some manner. These verses are Exod 4:22-23; Deut

1:31; 8:5; 14:1; Jer 3:22; 31:20; Hos 11:1-4; and Mal 3:17. While

these eight help to establish the fatherhood of God a further

fourteen examples in which direct fatherhood are mentioned also

exist Deut 32:6; 2 Sam 7:14 & 1 Chron 17:13; 22:10; 28:6; Isa

63:16; 64:8; Jeremiah 3:4, 19; 31:9; Psalm 68:5; 89:26; 103:13;

Mal 1:6; and 2:10. Even a handful of non-canonical references

directly address God as Father Wis 2:16; 14:3; Tob 13:4; Sir

23:1, 4; 51:10; Jub 1:24; 19:29; 3 Macc 5:7; 6:3, and 8. What

this suggests is that although “Father” is by no means a common

reference for God in the Old Testament it is well established

13

with special use in the Psalms and Intertestamental period. Jesus

is making a theological statement in regard to God’s intimacy and

character by selecting this term. “It [Father] is his [Jesus]

address to God in all but one of his prayers and the way of

addressing God that Jesus teaches to the disciples.”16 While “Our

Father” in its various forms is certainly more common, Miller is

right in suggesting that “[t]he ‘Our Father’ echoes the ‘My God’

of Old Testament prayer.” 17

Hallowed be your name your kingdom come“Address to God in the Bible and in human life generally

moves back and forth between pleas or petition and praise or

thanksgiving.18 This quote is particularly valuable in the

interpretation of the next line of the Lord’s Prayer. While the

former is easily interpreted as praise, the latter is typically a

petition. These phrases could, therefore, be addressed separately

and show two distinct aspects of prayer. To do so would break

apart what can be seen as a coherent statement of praise with

cause. Miller identifies one of the key components of Old

16 Miller, loc 4924.17 Ibid, loc 513018 Miller, loc 889.

14

Testament examples of prayer to be motivation.19 Even though that

is an external labeled applied to the text, Miller’s argument is

sound and could be further strengthened by a reference to the

influence of suzerain covenants on Israelite thought and

religion. Within suzerain covenants there is not only the titles

of the parties involved along with the stipulations of the

treaty, but also included are the plethora of reasons that the

parties should adhere to the document. Brutal punishment will

befall those who break the agreement, but so too will great

riches be reaped if the parties remain faithful. In this same

regard a word of praise lifted to God is stronger when the reason

for that praise is included. In the case of the Lord’s Prayer

“your kingdom come” is an appropriate motivation for the praise

of “hallowed be your name.”

The praising of God’s name is a common theme in the Old

Testament literature. Lifting up praise to the name of God takes

place often in the Psalms as part of a litany of praise. 1

Chronicles16:10, 35; 29:16; Psa 30:4; 33:21; 97:12; 103:1; 105:3;

106:47; and 145:21 all are addresses of praise to God’s Holy

19 Ibid, loc 917.

15

name. Meanwhile a warning against profaning God’s name is equally

present. Leviticus 20:3; 22:2, 32; Isa 57:15; Eze 20:39; 36:20-

22; 39:7, 25?; 43:7-8; and Amo 2:7 all oppose the profaning of

God’s name. The overlap of Psalm 103 with praising God’s name and

the coming of God’s kingdom helps to tie these two ideas together

as a praise/motivation pairing. Other places in which God’s

kingdom is addressed can be found in 2 Sa 7:12; Psa 103:19;

145:11-13; Dan 2:44; 4:3, 34, 36; 6:26; 7:14, 18, 22-23, 27; Oba

1:21; and Mic 4:8. These verses talk about the kingdom of God in

a manner which is at least somewhat eschatological.20 God’s

kingdom and God’s name are praise worthy and doing just that is

well founded in the Old Testament literature.

Give us each day our daily breadThe allusion to manna from heaven is almost impossible to

miss in this line. Exodus 16:4 describes God’s faithful gift of

daily bread given to his people. Outside of this allusion there

is almost no other textual evidence to support the idea of God

providing daily needs. While Miller contends that this is “the

20 Miller, loc 5192.

16

most fundamental prayer for God’s blessing and providence” there

are others who see the line very differently.21

Derrett Duncan recently wrote on the implications of the

line “daily bread” in the Matthean account of the Lord’s

Prayer.22 In his study he elevates bread from literal foodstuff

to spiritual fulfillment. He points to a handful of verses in

which bread is woefully insufficient for sustaining the people of

God. Deuteronomy 8:3; Psa 78; 111:5; and Isa 55:2 are said to

form a theology in which something much more than bread is

necessary. While the argument is passionately addressed, it falls

short of convincingly shifting Jesus’ emphasis from an allusion

to manna to another possibility. For Jesus the importance of the

prayer centers on the reliance on God and few Old Testament

stories illustrate that reliance better than the manna from

heaven experienced in the wilderness.

Duncan addresses in passing the same problem brought up more

than four decades ago by Yamauchi.23 The root of the difficulty 21 Ibid, loc 5204.22 Derrett, J Duncan M. "A searchlight on daily bread (Matthew 6:11)."

Evangelical Quarterly 84, no. 2 (April 1, 2012): 99-106. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed November 7, 2013).

23 Edwin M. Yamauchi, "Daily bread motif in antiquity." Westminster Theological Journal 28, no. 2 (May 1, 1966): 145-156. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed November 7, 2013).

17

is in how “daily” is understood. While a handful of verses seem

to mimic the very idea of getting a meal every day, Prov 30:8-9;

Jer 37:21; and Dan 1:5, Yamauchi articulates a cultural theme of

bread tied to the passage of time. He addresses Gilgamesh,

Egyptian texts, and other such Ancient Near Eastern cultures to

support his claim. Despite this attempt to detach the physical

need for sustenance from this line it truly does seem to be part

of what Jesus is teaching. When a reader takes into account the

number of times Jesus speaks of poverty and finances, a topic

addressed more than any other, it is relevant to hear a prayer

for sustenance. It matches other teachings in Matthew 6:25-34 and

Luke 12:22-32 in which God is the one in whom trust may be placed

for supplying every need. Despite a desire to recognize a

spiritual undertone to this line, the Old Testament allusion for

basic need remains the soundest theory.

Forgive our sins as we forgive everyone indebted to usSeeking forgiveness from God is very common in the Old

Testament. Four different kinds of forgiveness are displayed.

Personal forgiveness can be seen in Gen 50:17; Exod 10:17; 32:32;

1 Sa 25:28; Psa 25:18; and 32:5. Corporate forgiveness is

18

recorded in Deut 21:8; 1 Ki 8:30, 34, 36, 39, 50; 2 Ch 6:21, 25,

27, 30, 39; Psa 65:3; 79:9; 85:2; Jer 31:34; 33:8; 36:3; Eze

16:63 (uses singular metaphor to depict Israel corporately); Dan

9:19; and Amo 7:2. A handful of warnings in regard to God’s

unwillness to forgive are found in Jos 24:19; Isa 2:9; Jer 18:23;

and Has 1:6. Finally, unrequested forgiveness granted solely on

God’s onus are in 2 Ch 7:14 and Neh 9:17. In every single case

the power to forgive falls to God. These categories help to show

that it is good to seek forgiveness for self and for a whole

people group, but regardless of the request it is up to God to

either issue that forgiveness or not. It is even shown that God

can forgive even if no request is made. The Old Testament root is

strong for this aspect of the prayer, but the other half requires

a little more explanation.

Part of the Christian faith is not only recognition of the

needs and suffering of others, but an elevation of that need even

above a person’s own.24 Miller addresses the very important

aspect of this verse in which the person praying seeking

forgiveness on behalf of their own wrongdoers. While this type of

24 Miller, loc 5072.

19

behavior is alluded to in Lev 19;18b and Deut 5:14b it is

interesting to note that the line is thematically identical to

Sir 28:2.25 “Forgive your neighbor the wrong he has done, and

then your sins will be pardoned when you pray.” The development

of forgiveness for self dependant on a willingness to forgive

others begins to emerge in this Intertestamental book and

continues throughout Jesus and then the rest of the New Testament

writer’s teachings. This prayer teaches a letting go of animosity

and elevates the importance of community. Of all the lines

addressed in this prayer this one is the nearest to a “new”

teaching while all others are a re-casting of well established

Old Testament doctrine.

And lead us not into temptationThis final section of Luke’s prayer is one of great

interest. James 1:13 seems to undermine any New Testament

theology which would suggest God is a tempter of the faithful.

While 1 Corinthians 10:13 does place God in a temptation

regulating role. Miller suggests that a request for God to

strengthen the person praying when facing God’s testing is what

25 Ibid, loc 5218.

20

is intended.26 As this fails to address the aforementioned James

passage closer scrutiny must occur. Knowles cites a connection

between testing and temptation which must be understood in order

to grasp the meaning of this line.27 Knowles’ line of reasoning

is that the followers of Jesus were amongst some of the least

holy and least renowned men. If they were to be put to a test by

God they would fail, thus “test us not” would be a powerful

reference to the grace Jesus is extending to his followers.28

“Although the motif is clearly redactional, Mark’s gospel

confirms such a view of ‘testing’ [that the disciples would fail

any test] and discipleship alike.”29 While the clear redaction is

much more difficult to discern than Knowles would lead a reader

to believe he does present an excellent argument for the idea of

the testing of Abraham being a key component to second century

BCE religion.30

A personal assessment of the material shows testing in some

form or another to be a widely used motif in the Old Testament.

Genesis 42:15-16; Jdg 7:3; 1 Ki 10:1; 2 Ch 9:1; Ecc 2:1; 7:23; 26 Ibid, loc 5231.27 Knowles, 193.28 Ibid.29 Ibid.30 Ibid.

21

Lam 3:40; Dan 1:12, and 14 all address the testing of people by

people. God is the one testing in Gen 22:1; Deut 8:16; 33:8; Jdg

2:22; 3:1; 7:4; Job 7:18; Psa 11:4; 26:2; 66:10; 81:7; 105:19;

Isa 28:16; Jer 9:7; and Zech 13:9. A cautionary message not to

test God can be found in Deut 6:16; Psa 78:18, 41, 56; 95:9;

106:14; Isa 7:12; and Mal 3:15. One solitary command to test God

is found in Malachi 3:10, which precedes one of the commands not

to test God. While a handful of “tests” could be referenced most

actually speak of discernment rather than an attempt to get God

to do tricks. Most notable of these categories are the times in

which God tested his followers or a single follower. Knowles

seems to be accurate in the placing of grace rather than a Divine

test as the intention of the prayer. Such testing would be

something the disciples seem unlikely to be able to pass.

Tell us then what this meansJesus did not teach his disciples in a vacuum, nor did he

simply pull a prayer out of thin air. In response to their

request to be taught how to prayer, Jesus presents an

amalgamation of tradition and theology with which they were

familiar to guide them in their prayer. Every single facet of the

22

prayer is steeped in Old Testament theology and informed by Old

Testament Scripture. The Lucan account of the Lord’s prayer

reflects the fullness of Old Testament thought on prayer

condensed into an easy to remember and infinitely valuable

pericope. In ministry such fundamental questions about, through

both the expansive teachings of the Old Testament and the

revelation of God through Jesus the Christ in the New Testament a

more well-rounded response can be provided. Just as prayer can be

explained as an Old Testament foundation with a New Testament

coat of paint, so too can myriad other topics. This neither

markedly minimizes the importance of the Old Testament texts, nor

does it allow even the possibility of removing the Old Testament

from the picture. Ministry can be a grand adventure of

explanation and all the blocks must be taken into account.

The effect the Old Testament has on prayer is profound. Even

with the paradigm of the Lord’s Prayer in the New Testament that

teaching relies on what came before. In ministry the very same

question could be raised word for word, “teach me how to pray.”

The response to that request must take the shape of a graceful

weaving together of traditions. A specific ministry plan in

23

regard to prayer, or any other topic for that matter, must be

informed by a deep exploration of both the Old and New

Testaments. Every question has an easy answer, but a more

thoughtful and detailed response is of much higher value. In many

ways this entire paper outlines a ministry plan. When faced with

a question, dig deep. While not every jot and title may be

relayed to the one being answered, the answer still encompasses

all of that work. Jesus’ response represents well this

responsibility, a responsibility all ministers share.

BIBLIOGRAPHYDuncan, Derrett. "A searchlight on daily bread (Matthew 6:11)."

Evangelical Quarterly 84, no. 2 (April 1, 2012): 99-106.

Knowles, Michael P. "Once more 'lead us not eis peirasmon'." Expository Times 115, no. 6 (March 1, 2004): 191-194.

Miller, Patrick D. They Cried to the Lord: the Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. “Daily bread motif in antiquity." Westminster Theological Journal 28, no. 2 (May 1, 1966): 145-156.

24