Pope wants part of the Lord's Prayer changed

[angeldeb82]

Well, I can tell that he wants to change "Lead us not into temptation", because he believes that the Devil, not God, leads us into temptation.  What's up with that?!

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/lead-us-not-into-mistranslation-pope-wants-lords-prayer-changed

[Former Member]

Why change it now?

[User 180565 is taking donation]

Dec 9, 2017 17:46:26 GMT -8 @thecaptainstable said:

Why change it now?

Because God told him to.

[♥ ℒʊ√ ♥]

Dec 9, 2017 14:56:35 GMT -8 angeldeb82 said:

Well, I can tell that he wants to change "Lead us not into temptation", because he believes that the Devil, not God, leads us into temptation.  What's up with that?!

www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/lead-us-not-into-mistranslation-pope-wants-lords-prayer-changed

And he is correct.

It is the devil that leads us into temptation. God leads us to salvation.

It was the devil that tempted Eve, not God.


In the Catholic Church, the Lord's Prayer as undergone changes before. 

The logic is easy to understand. 


But I've always taken "Lead us not into temptation" literally. I take it as lead us not to fall into temptation and doing the devil's bidding.

[Bugme]

No, the pope is not correct. To change the prayer is to change God's Word:

Matthew 6:9-13 (KJV)

"9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

11 Give us this day our daily bread.

12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.

13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."

Instead of changing the Word, it should be taught by the clergy that it means: let us not fall into temptation. Religious leaders are always trying to change the Word because they think laity is too dumb to understand. Thus, they are indirectly stating that God somehow made a mistake when He gave us the Word.

[stevecureboi]

He can change it if he wants. The copyright must have expired by now right?

In any case, it has nothing to do with god's word. Those were the words of Jesus Christ, just as "ho ho ho" are the words of Santa Claus & "It's a trap" were the words of Admiral Akbar. All 3 being fictional characters.

So go ahead & change it. It's not like it means anything anyway.

[Bugme]

Dec 14, 2017 11:00:14 GMT -8 stevecureboi said:

He can change it if he wants. The copyright must have expired by now right?

In any case, it has nothing to do with god's word. Those were the words of Jesus Christ, just as "ho ho ho" are the words of Santa Claus & "It's a trap" were the words of Admiral Akbar. All 3 being fictional characters.

So go ahead & change it. It's not like it means anything anyway.

I'm going to pray for you.

[♥ ℒʊ√ ♥]

He has the right to change it.

The Catholic version hasn't always included what is called the doxology, “For thine…” In the bible there was a tradition of concluding prayers with a short, hymn-like verse exalting God's glory. This particular doxology that end's the Our Father is found in David’s prayer I Chronicles 29:10-13 of the Old Testament.  Jews used these doxologies to conclude prayers at the time of our Lord.


But when discussing prayer with His disciples, our Lord said, “This is how you are to pray: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread and forgive us the wrong we have done as we forgive those who wrong us. Subject us not to the trial but deliver us from the evil one'” (Matthew 6:9-13). A similar version is found in Luke 11:2-4. Both versions do not include the ending sentence found in the Protestant version, “For thine is the Kingdom, the power, and the glory now and forever.”

[Bugme]

Dec 14, 2017 11:38:04 GMT -8 ♥ ℒʊ√ ♥ said:

He has the right to change it.

The Catholic version hasn't always included what is called the doxology, “For thine…” In the bible there was a tradition of concluding prayers with a short, hymn-like verse exalting God's glory. This particular doxology that end's the Our Father is found in David’s prayer I Chronicles 29:10-13 of the Old Testament.  Jews used these doxologies to conclude prayers at the time of our Lord.


But when discussing prayer with His disciples, our Lord said, “This is how you are to pray: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread and forgive us the wrong we have done as we forgive those who wrong us. Subject us not to the trial but deliver us from the evil one'” (Matthew 6:9-13). A similar version is found in Luke 11:2-4. Both versions do not include the ending sentence found in the Protestant version, “For thine is the Kingdom, the power, and the glory now and forever.”

I'm a Protestant so, on that part you are correct. However the most accurately translated version of the Bible based on the oldest texts available is the KJV 1611 version which does have it stated as I noted in my previous post. The pope can do what he wants but, I still disagree.

[angeldeb82]

Dec 14, 2017 11:38:04 GMT -8 ♥ ℒʊ√ ♥ said:

He has the right to change it.

The Catholic version hasn't always included what is called the doxology, “For thine…” In the bible there was a tradition of concluding prayers with a short, hymn-like verse exalting God's glory. This particular doxology that end's the Our Father is found in David’s prayer I Chronicles 29:10-13 of the Old Testament.  Jews used these doxologies to conclude prayers at the time of our Lord.


But when discussing prayer with His disciples, our Lord said, “This is how you are to pray: ‘Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread and forgive us the wrong we have done as we forgive those who wrong us. Subject us not to the trial but deliver us from the evil one'” (Matthew 6:9-13). A similar version is found in Luke 11:2-4. Both versions do not include the ending sentence found in the Protestant version, “For thine is the Kingdom, the power, and the glory now and forever.”

I think I notice something.  At the end of the Lord's Prayer, which we say in church, the priest says, "Deliver us, Lord, we pray, from every evil; graciously grant peace in our days, that by the help of your mercy we may always be free from sin and safe from all distress, as we await the blessed hope and the coming of our Savior, Jesus Christ."  And we respond with: "For the kingdom, the power, and the glory are yours, now and for ever."

[♥ ℒʊ√ ♥]

For me, Bugme and angeldeb82 , it's the fact that many of us still pray that encourages me.

My most heartfelt prayers are the times I simply have a conversation rather than recite a rote prayer.


And yes, angeldeb82 , that's exactly right. After we recite the Lord's prayer, the priest does indeed say that. And that response by the faithful was just added to our liturgy not that long ago to incorporate the Jewish doxology.

[daniel]

Dec 14, 2017 10:15:03 GMT -8 Bugme said:

No, the pope is not correct. To change the prayer is to change God's Word:

I guess everyone had better go learn the bible words in the language God said them?

Oh, wait, that's right, they've been translated and mistranslated repeatedly over the thousands of years..

That's pretty much the Pope's point, that he wants to fix prior mistranslations- ie where man apparently messed up their translation of "God's word."


It doesn't effect me. I just think it's odd to be against correcting man-made mistakes.

[Bugme]

Dec 14, 2017 16:12:14 GMT -8 daniel said:

Dec 14, 2017 10:15:03 GMT -8 Bugme said:

No, the pope is not correct. To change the prayer is to change God's Word:

I guess everyone had better go learn the bible words in the language God said them?

Oh, wait, that's right, they've been translated and mistranslated repeatedly over the thousands of years..

That's pretty much the Pope's point, that he wants to fix prior mistranslations- ie where man apparently messed up their translation of "God's word."


It doesn't effect me. I just think it's odd to be against correcting man-made mistakes.

And how do you know you're not mistaken?

[daniel]

Dec 14, 2017 18:27:16 GMT -8 Bugme said:

And how do you know you're not mistaken?

Well, I wasn't born quite yet, but I'm pretty sure that Moses didn't write the first part of the Old Testament in Latin, nor did the Apostles write the Gospels in English.

To assume infallibility and inerrancy in human written language means that you're placing faith in men, possibly an idolatrous level of faith at that.

Also, God's a big boy. He's perfectly free to send a clarified and unequivocal text. We may need a whole new language for that, though, as all human languages tend to have internal conflicts or overlap of meaning.

[Bugme]

Dec 14, 2017 18:50:37 GMT -8 daniel said:

Dec 14, 2017 18:27:16 GMT -8 Bugme said:

And how do you know you're not mistaken?

Well, I wasn't born quite yet, but I'm pretty sure that Moses didn't write the first part of the Old Testament in Latin, nor did the Apostles write the Gospels in English.

To assume infallibility and inerrancy in human written language means that you're placing faith in men, possibly an idolatrous level of faith at that.

Also, God's a big boy. He's perfectly free to send a clarified and unequivocal text. We may need a whole new language for that, though, as all human languages tend to have internal conflicts or overlap of meaning.

Have you thought that maybe God doesn't send a better text since He already did so through inspired men of God? Of course I'm just a silly believer who has seen the Word work fine just the way it is without need of improvement or updates. Enjoy life Daniel.