Jesus’ model prayer may be considered a theological source.

Marek Harastej

The Lord’s Prayer, also known as Our Father, is generally considered to be one of the key texts of Christianity. This prayer is recorded in the Bible in Matthew as part of the Sermon on the Mount (6:9–13) and in Luke in the context of the story of Mary and Martha and the pericope about our petitions being answered (11:2–4). Hundreds of different cards, booklets, books, or devotional texts based on this prayer have been published in various languages. Most of these are intended for simple repetition of the prayer or for spiritual, mystical meditation on this text. But increasingly, in the Christian context, there are also various treatises that ask about the theological implications of this text in the search for a proper image of God.

From the earliest days of Christianity, this text was often interpreted and preached by many theologians. Tertullian called it “a summary of the whole Gospel,”1 Cyprian “a summary of the doctrine of heaven,”2 Augustine “the core of Christian spirituality,”3 and it was part of the preparation for baptism in the post-apostolic church.4

For many Christians today, this prayer is also an important element of their spirituality, and for some, a core part of their theology. In the case of the catechism of the Catholic Church or the work of Joseph Ratzinger,5 we more or less assume such a conception, but many non-Catholic theologians have also been engaged in thinking about it and seeking its theological implications. The list of authors who have written commentaries on it would be long and would include many names of Christian theologians not only from the time of Christian antiquity and the Middle Ages, but also the names of Reformers and Protestant authors.

It may surprise us, however, that we would not find many Adventist theologians among them. Of the current selection of Adventist books sold at adventistbookcenter.com and of the more than 100 books found by a search engine for the keyword prayer, only one deals exclusively with the Lord’s Prayer.6 It is the book by the Gottfried Oosterwal, The Lord’s Prayer Through Primitive Eyes.7 We find sermons or articles by Adventist ministers on this subject more often, but it is almost always in the context of practical piety or spirituality, rarely in the context of systematic theology. The Fundamental Beliefs of the Adventist Church do not mention this prayer at all, nor does the book Seventh-day Adventists Believe.8

The last time the topic of prayer was specifically studied in the Sabbath school was in 2001. Of the 13 lessons, one was devoted to the prayer of David, one to the prayer of Moses, and so on. One of the lessons was devoted to Jesus Christ, but in the context of the High Priestly prayer. But only one day in the opening lesson was devoted to the Lord’s Prayer. The last time the Sabbath School lessons specifically addressed the subject of the Lord’s Prayer was in 1932. Although the lessons were brief at that time, the study was surprisingly strongly systematic in its theological focus.9

Ellen G. White maintained that the Lord’s Prayer was not given to us simply to repeat, but as an inspiration and model for our prayers,10 but at the same time, the words of the prayer were for her a theological source to which she repeatedly referred.11 She made dozens of references to it in her work, devoting an entire chapter to it in the book Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing.

In this context, the question arises as to why we as Seventh-day Adventists do not more often refer to the Lord’s Prayer in a theological context. Herein is an approach to the theological meaning of this prayer with a specific example, choosing the concept of the Great Controversy, which is characteristic of Adventist theology and also forming the basic paradigm of Adventist theology. In the Seventh-day Adventist Fundamental Beliefs, this doctrine is described as follows:

“All humanity is now involved in a great controversy between Christ and Satan regarding the character of God, His law, and His sovereignty over the universe. This conflict originated in heaven when a created being, endowed with freedom of choice, in self-exaltation became Satan, God’s adversary, and led into rebellion a portion of the angels. He introduced the spirit of rebellion into this world when he led Adam and Eve into sin. This human sin resulted in the distortion of the image of God in humanity, the disordering of the created world, and its eventual devastation at the time of the worldwide flood. Observed by the whole creation, this world became the arena of the universal conflict, out of which the God of love will ultimately be vindicated. To assist His people in this controversy, Christ sends the Holy Spirit and the loyal angels to guide, protect, and sustain them in the way of salvation.”12

This statement is then supported by references to the following biblical passages: Genesis 3; 6–8; Job 1:6–12; Isa. 14:12–14; Eze. 28:12–18; Rom. 1:19–32; 3:4; 5:12–21; 8:19–22; 1 Cor. 4:9; Heb. 1:14; 1 Peter 5:8; 2 Peter 3:6; Rev. 12:4–9.13 Although the quoted text itself mentions Christ right at the beginning, none of the biblical passages refers directly to His teachings. Yet the Adventist commentary on these statements, the book Seventh-day Adventists Believe . . . , explicitly states: ‘Theology, by definition a study of God and His relationship with His creatures, must unfold all doctrines in the light of Christ . . . The mandate of Christian theology is to inspire confidence in the authority of the Word of God and to replace all other suggested centers of truth with Christ. When it does so, true Christian theology serves the church well, for it goes to the root of the cosmic controversy, exposes it, and meets it with the only incontrovertible argument—Christ as revealed in the Scriptures.’”14

A closer look at the Lord’s Prayer discloses references to the key theme of the Great Controversy.

“‘Our Father in heaven,’” (vs. 9)15

Prayer, of course, played an important role in the Judaism of the time of Jesus Christ. Much research points to the similarities between Jewish and Christian prayer in the early centuries, but despite the many similarities and parallels,16 there is a fundamental difference in the initial address to God. The Old Testament also refers to God as Father in a number of places, but addressing God in this way in prayer is not common.17 For Jesus to address Him in this way must have had a profound meaning.

The word father only makes sense in a relationship. A person in different social roles is usually referred to in different ways—friend, colleague, pastor, manager, or neighbor. Some labels refer to age, others to profession or social status, and still others to relationship. The term father is relational. A man becomes a father by virtue of his relationship with his child. The context of the Great Controversy may explain why Jesus used this title. Jesus presents God as One who desires the closest conceivable relationship with humankind, which in our human context is described by the relationship of father and child. Similarly, this emphasis appears in the letter to the seven churches, where each letter ends with a promise. It is interesting how the promises progressively escalate. The letter to the church at Ephesus concludes with one promise, to Smyrna with two, Thyatira with three, and so on. The letter to the church at Laodicea, in this sequence, should end with seven promises, but it ends with only one. However, this promise refers precisely to the relationship between God and believers as that of a father and his child.

God desires a restoration of relationship with man. God wants to convince us, in the context of the controversy over His character, that His relationship to us is one of love and openness.

Ellen G. White also placed the interpretation of the opening phrase “Our Father” in the context of the Great Controversy when she writes: “Jesus teaches us to call His Father our Father. . . . So ready, so eager, is the Saviour’s heart to welcome us as members of the family of God, that in the very first words we are to use in approaching God He places the assurance of our divine relationship, ‘Our Father.’ . . . The world that Satan has claimed and has ruled over with cruel tyranny, the Son of God has, by one vast achievement, encircled in His love and connected again with the throne of Jehovah. . . . The infinite God, said Jesus, makes it your privilege to approach Him by the name of Father. Understand all that this implies.”18

Further, in her book The Great Controversy, she stated: “The mystery of the cross explains all other mysteries. In the light that streams from Calvary the attributes of God which had filled us with fear and awe appear beautiful and attractive. Mercy, tenderness, and parental love are seen to blend with holiness, justice, and power. While we behold the majesty of His throne, high and lifted up, we see His character in its gracious manifestations, and comprehend, as never before, the significance of that endearing title, ‘Our Father.’"19

“Hallowed be Your name.” (vs. 10)

The first petition of the prayer concerns the holiness of God’s name. It thus refers to key texts of the Old Testament (Ex. 3:13–15; 20:7; 33:18, 19; 34:5–8; Deut. 6:4; Isa. 6:1–6), as well as to the essence of the Great Controversy, in which Satan challenges God’s character and defames His name and His reputation. With the first petition of the Lord’s Prayer, the person praying enters into the story of the Great Controversy and becomes part of it. He or she joins in asking for the sanctification (or cleansing) of God’s name. This aspect is highlighted by the preceding sentence, which ends with a reference to the heavens (“‘Our Father in heaven . . .’”) placing this request in a wider cosmic context. Ultimately, this framework gives the prayer itself a profound meaning, for if we see the term holiness only as God’s “perfection,” then the praying person here on earth can add or subtract nothing to it. But asking for it makes sense in the context of the struggle to vindicate His name that is taking place throughout the universe, but especially on our earth, which has become a theater for the entire universe. Ellen G. White’s interpretation of the Lord’s Prayer in her book Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing virtually ignores this dimension.20 However, she emphasized it sufficiently in other parts of her work.

“‘Your kingdom come.’” (vs. 10)

The request for the coming of the kingdom of God can be interpreted in different ways. In His teachings, Jesus Christ often spoke of the kingdom of God in a dual perspective—as something yet to come, but at the same time already present. He spoke of a kingdom that would one day be realized in its tangible form, as well as something that takes place in the heart of the believer. On all these levels, this part of the prayer can also be legitimately interpreted. But Seventh-day Adventists have always been characterized by a strong emphasis on the soon coming of Jesus Christ as our Savior. In this context, then, we can also read this petition as an expression of longing for Christ’s return and for an end to the Great Controversy between good and evil.

And it is in this sense that Ellen G. White also interpreted this petition: “And Christ will take to Himself His great power and will reign. The heavenly gates are again to be lifted up, and with ten thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands of holy ones, our Saviour will come forth as King of kings and Lord of lords. Jehovah Immanuel ‘shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and His name one.’ ‘The tabernacle of God’ shall be with men, ‘and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God.’”21

The sequence of these petitions is also worth noting. The relationship of God’s love for people (“‘Our Father in heaven . . .’”) leads to the vindication of His name (“‘Hallowed be Your name . . .’”) which culminates in the second coming of Jesus Christ (“‘Your kingdom come . . .’”). The second coming of Jesus Christ is thus not a political, ecological, or social matter, but the culmination of a cosmic struggle between good and evil, God and Satan, for the truth concerning the character of God.

“Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven.’” (vs. 10)

Many interpretations emphasize the petition “‘Your will be done’” as the specific center and interpretive key of the entire Lord’s Prayer.22 Whether or not this is the case, this petition of Jesus’ prayer is the culmination of the previous three sentences (the address and the two petitions). This would be suggested, for example, by the recurring mention of heaven, which refers to the first clause of the prayer. This third prayer request also has a strong connection to the great story of good and evil. We can read it as a cry for God’s intervention in this sinful world, but also as a longing for the eschatological victory of His will in this universe. The praying believer longs for God’s victory, for the restoration of the universe, in which God’s will shall once again be the determining factor. It is an expression of the desire for God’s will to become a reality both in the universe and in the personal life of the one who prays in this way.

This is how Ellen G. White read this sentence. In her commentary, she again returned to Satan’s rebellion in heaven and concludes the section by saying: “The petition, ‘Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven,’ is a prayer that the reign of evil on this earth may be ended, that sin may be forever destroyed, and the kingdom of righteousness be established. Then in earth as in heaven will be fulfilled ‘all the good pleasure of His goodness.’”23

“‘Give us today our daily bread.”  (vs. 11)

After the opening address and the subsequent three petitions, each of which in its own way addresses the issue of the Great Controversy and builds on the others, it might seem that the petition for bread is the part of the prayer that is entirely focused on our physical needs. Certainly, it concerns them as well, but in this petition, we can also perceive a deeper dimension which is directed again to the question of the conflict between good and evil.

The first biblical mention of bread occurs in the context of the fall into sin, when, through the sin of Adam and Eve, our world became part of the Great Controversy (Gen. 3:19). The second mention of bread appears in connection with Melchizedek, who brings bread and wine as a typological foreshadowing of Jesus Christ (Gen. 14:18). Among many other occurrences, the symbolism of manna as the bread from heaven (Ex. 16:4), the loaves in the sanctuary (Ex. 24:30), the miracle of the multiplication of the bread (Matt. 25:32–39), and Jesus’ preaching about the bread of life (John 6:26) are worth mentioning. The whole image of bread in the Bible then culminates in the identification of Jesus’ body with the bread at the Last Supper (Mark 14:22). The image of bread thus changes from a symbol of the curse of sin to an image of redemption.

The petition for bread thus refers not only to our physical need, but also to our spiritual need for God’s presence during our journey through life in a sinful world.

If we follow the way Ellen G. White interpreted this prayer, we can see that it not only refers to the sin of Adam and Eve, but also refers to the spiritual needs of humankind in this context. “The prayer for daily bread includes not only food to sustain the body, but that spiritual bread which will nourish the soul unto life everlasting.”24

“‘And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors.’” (vs. 12)

The forgiveness of sin and the salvation of the sinner is the very heart of the gospel. Jesus Christ died on Calvary, thus settling the Great Controversy. But He dies not only to redeem the sinner from sin, but also to vindicate the character of God, reconcile humankind to God, and end the Great Controversy. In interpreting this part of the prayer, the plural used in this petition points in this latter direction. Certainly, the content of the prayer is a petition for the individual sinner’s forgiveness, but the broader context is precisely a petition for “us” and for “our” guilt, for reconciliation with God, where the blood of Jesus is shed for all of us.

Ellen G. White made a similar comment, writing: “But forgiveness has a broader meaning than many suppose. When God gives the promise that He ‘will abundantly pardon,’ He adds, as if the meaning of that promise exceeded all that we could comprehend: ‘My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.’ Isaiah 55:7–9. God’s forgiveness is not merely a judicial act by which He sets us free from condemnation. It is not only forgiveness for sin, but reclaiming from sin. It is the outflow of redeeming love that transforms the heart. David had the true conception of forgiveness when he prayed, ‘Create in me a clean heart.’”25

“‘And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.’” (vs. 13)

At the end of the Lord’s Prayer, the theme of the Great Controversy appears quite explicitly. The Greek form used refers not only to the general, but to the personified evil, God’s enemy, Satan. The choice of the verb for deliverance (salvation) goes in the same direction– instead of the expected verb, which usually denotes deliverance from illness or trouble, the prayer uses another verb, which in Greek usually denotes deliverance in battle. The believer is led by Jesus to pray for rescue in the great battle between good and evil in which we as humanity find ourselves. Again, phrased in the plural–this is about humanity, not just individuals.

Ellen G. White also interpreted this passage as a reference to the war between God and Satan when she wrote: “The enemy leads us into sin, and then he accuses us before the heavenly universe as unworthy of the love of God. . . . The soul that through divine power resists temptation reveals to the world and to the heavenly universe the efficiency of the grace of Christ.”26

The prayer thus ends with the same theme with which it began. It began with a petition for the sanctification of God’s name and ends with a petition for deliverance from evil, or (in an eschatological sense) for the end of the Great Controversy.

This prayer is often cited with a final doxology (“‘For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’”), but this was most likely not originally part of the text, but is a later addition.27 The earliest interpreters of this prayer, such as Gregory of Nyssa, end their interpretation with a final petition.28 If, however, we want to add the final words of the doxology to the prayer, then we might see them as explicitly taking a stand, with the believer taking the full side of God in the context of the Great Controversy. He or she is thus expressing faith in God’s ultimate victory. Ellen White’s interpretation of this idea is similar.

Why, then, is this specific view of the Lord’s Prayer important? This prayer is very well known. Most Christians know it by heart, and even many who do not consider themselves Christians know it. For many people it is the core of their piety, and for others it is often the little they do know about Christianity. Because of the misuse of this text for thoughtless memorization, many Seventh-day Adventists approach it with some caution, and when they do speak of it, it is as a general model for our prayers. It is a pity, however, that it is not more often used as a theological source. We may very well draw on it, for example, in interpreting the Great Controversy, and so make the subject accessible to those for whom it is an important part of their spirituality. It would certainly be worth considering quoting this prayer more often in our Fundamental Beliefs, Sabbath school lessons, books, Bible classes, public lectures, and evangelistic materials. Surprisingly, it has been nearly 100 years since we last addressed this prayer in Sabbath school, even though as Adventists we have much to say about this prayer and which could help people understand it better. One may imagine Bible lessons presenting what Adventists believe, structured around this prayer, or evangelistic materials that would help people go to the heart of this prayer. This is exactly what Ellen G. White was doing in her interpretation of the deeper meaning of this unique prayer, and her legacy remains a continuing inspiration.

Marek Harastej, BTh, MA, is Principal of the Czecho-Slovakian Union Adventist Theological Institute, Prague, Czech Republic.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Tertullianus, De Oratione 1, 6.

2. Angelo Scarano, “Globalní Pohled na Modlitbu Pane” in Communio–Mezinarodni Katolicka Revue–Otce Nas, Jenz Jsi na Nebesich. Sv. 74, 1/2015. Str. 8-21. (Praha: Karmelitanske Nakladatelstvi, 2015), 8.

3. Augustinus, Epistula, 130, 12, 22.

4. Vojtech Novotný, Editorial in Communio–Mezinarodni Katolicka Revue–Otce nas, Jenz Jsi na Nebesich. Sv. 74, 1/2015. str. 5–7 (Praha: Karmelitanske Nakladatelstvi, 2015), 6; David Voprada, Svaty Augustin–Promluvy o Modlitbe Pane (Praha: Krystal OP, 2019), 7–23.

5. Joseph Ratzinger, Jesus von Nazareth (Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 2007), 161–203.

6. Pacific Press Publishing Association, Adventist Book Center Online at https://adventistbookcenter.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=Prayer (cit. 2023-11-14).

7. Gottfried Oosterwal, The Lord’s Prayer Through Primitive Eyes (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press, 2009).

8. It is worth noting that this is not a specifically Adventist position, but is consistent with the general evangelical position on the Lord’s Prayer. It is also essentially ignored in his interpretation of theology by, for example, Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Academic, 1994) or John MacArthur and Richard Mayhue, eds., Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 2017).

9. The author was the Adventist Bible scholar Lynn H. Wood, president of Emmanuel Missionary College, now Andrews University.

10. See, for example, The Great Controversy, 524; Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, 102–122; Ms. 23, 1899; Testimonies for the Church, 6:357. In some references, however, Ellen White does not rule out its repetition if it is also thoughtful: “In this same Scripture the Lord’s prayer is given. Repeat this prayer every day. Open your hearts to Christ’s grace and power. Be assured that if you feel your need, the Author of the prayer will hear you as you pray: ‘Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy name. . . .’” (Ms. 46, 1902). See also Ms. 146, 1902, or “Our Duties as Parents,” Adventist Review and Herald 84:10 (March 1, 1907): 8.

11. The Great Controversy, 652; Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, 102–122.

12. Https://ssnet.org/about-us/fundamental-beliefs-seventh-day-adventists/great-controversy.

13. However, the theme of the Great Controversy is explicitly or implicitly mentioned in other Fundamental Beliefs (4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28).

14. The Ministerial Association of Seventh-day Adventists, Seventh-day Adventists Believe: A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines (Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1988), 122.

15. The excerpts from the Lord’s Prayer in this article are quoted from the New King James Version of the Bible.

16. For comparison, see, for example, the detailed work of the Catholic theologian František Kunetka comparing Christian anaphora and Jewish prayers (Zidovske Koreny Krestanske Anafory, [Olomouc: Univerzita Palackeho v Olomouci, 2014]) or the work focused on Jewish prayer by Carmine de Sante, Jewish Prayer–The Origins of the Christian Liturgy (Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, 1991).

17. “When God is called ‘Father’ in the Old Testament (about fifteen times), it is always in reference to fatherhood in relation to Israel and the relationship of the nation of Israel’s obedience to God. As far as God is concerned this sovereign power is always accompanied by a reminder of the almost maternal tenderness that God feels for his children. The term ‘Father’ is rarely found in the intertestamental literature, very important for understanding the liturgical and cultural horizon of the New Testament” (Jean-Robert Armogathe, “Zidovske Liturgicke Pozadi Modlitby Pane” in Communio–Mezinarodni Katolicka Revue–Otce Nas, Jenz Jsi na Nebesich. Sv. 74, 1/2015), str. 5–7. [Praha: Karmelitanske Nakladatelstvi], 2015), 52. “The frequency of the word ‘Father’ on the lips of Jesus varies considerably from one Gospel to another: only four times in Mark, but 109 times in John out of a total of 170 occurrences in all four Gospels. The term usually appears in a liturgical context, in the context of prayer” (Armogathe, “Zidovske Liturgicke Pozadi Modlitby Pane,” 54).

18. Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, 103–105.

19. The Great Controversy, 652.

20. Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, 105–107.

21. Ibid., 108.

22. For example, the Catholic theologian Romano Guardini begins his commentary with an interpretation of this prayer (Romano Guardini, The Lord’s Prayer [Nashua: Sophia Institute Press, 2014]) and the Protestant theologian Jan Milíč Lochman emphasizes this prayer with reference to the prayer “Your will be done” of Jesus Christ in Gethsemane (Jan Milic Lochman, Unser Vater: Auslegung des Vaterunsers [Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1988]).

23. Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, 110.

24. Ibid., 112.

25. Ibid., 114.

26. Ibid., 117.

27. Ellen G. White, in her interpretation of the Lord’s Prayer in her book Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing, considered this doxology to be part of the prayer, 120–122.

28. Gregory of Nyssa, The Lord’s Prayer; The Beatitudes.