Here’s my fairly literal translation of these verses:
13bbecause Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory into the ages. Amen.
This final line of the Lord’s prayer is of interest to study for two reasons. The first is the question of its authenticity, as any observant Bible student will notice it is left out of many modern Bible translations or at least questioned in their footnotes. The second reason for study is simply our insatiable desire to mine the treasures of God’s Word.
As far as the authenticity, I have my own resolved opinion on the matter. I’ve read the reasons “for and against” as recorded by many different authors. The main focus of debate is usually a matter of what is called “textual criticism.” There are literally thousands of copies of the Bible recorded in a myriad of languages and all down through the ages. Like any other document, when people copy things by hand, they invariably make mistakes and even sometimes deliberately alter the text for one reason or another. This was true not only of the Bible, but every other copied manuscript throughout history. Textual criticism has to be practiced even on Shakespeare's writings!
Textual criticism is a science of gathering the evidence, analyzing it, then drawing conclusions based on those considerations. I am a graduate Civil Engineer and started working in the field fifty years ago next August (1976-2026). I love science. It is the foundation of everything we do as engineers – to take science, apply it to the issues people face, and to try to do good to our fellow human beings.
All that said, as I turn to my Bible studies, I have, over the years paid very close attention to any issues of textual criticism which I encountered in the passages I’ve translated and studied. One of my conclusions from all of that is to observe that scientists make lousy theologians and theologians make lousy scientists. I would guess that most theologians would cheer my assertion that scientists make lousy theologians. The whole business of evolution is a prime example. Scientists created the theory specifically for the purpose of undermining theology, while in so doing they’ve created a “scientific” theory that is blatantly unscientific. Science can try as it might, but it cannot exclude the God who created and overrules it all.
Again, theologians may, at this point, be cheering all I’m saying. However, they won’t like it when I turn the tables and tell them that they make lousy scientists. Once again, textual criticism is, in itself, purely a science. It is a business of gathering facts, analyzing facts, and drawing conclusions based on those facts. One of the most obvious evidences that theologians make lousy scientists is their use of textual criticism itself. As you read through a study Bible, you’ll see many footnotes calling attention to places where there are, in fact, different wordings found in the ancient manuscripts. Those notes often say something like “the best and most reliable manuscripts do not include…”
“Best and most reliable.” I could lay out two dusty old manuscripts of any writing and ask you, “Which of these is ‘best’ and ‘most reliable’?” I hope you would look at them and say to me, “That is a ridiculous question. They are two old pieces of paper with ink on them. ‘Best’ and ‘most reliable’ are completely subjective terms. That is not science.” And you would be correct. This is just one of the many places where theologians have resorted to practicing science and in so doing, ended up making statements which are blatantly unscientific. Theologians make lousy scientists. Any good scientist will tell you that subjective evidence is no evidence at all.
I guess here is my rub on the whole matter: The Bible isn’t just another collection of old manuscripts to stretch out on a table and dissect like some formaldehyde-soaked frog. The Bible is God’s Word. It says itself it is “alive and powerful.” It says itself it is “God-breathed.” Peter observed that “prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit,” and that too many “ignorant and unstable” people handle the Scriptures and “distort” them “as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction” (II Peter 1:21 & 3:16).
Unbelievers will never understand this, and in fact they cannot. “The natural man cannot understand the things of God, for they are spiritually discerned” (I Cor. 2:14). When a person comes to God they must come first of all by faith. “And without faith, it is impossible to please God, for he that comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” (Heb. 11:6).
Part of all this is that, again, us believers understand that the Bible is not just another book. It is the Word of God. When we read the Bible, we are (or should be) in our minds meeting with the Lord Himself. As someone once said, “To read your Bible is to look into the eyes of God.” Where all this leads is that we believers come to the Bible first of all in faith. Faith is not science. Faith is an intensely personal interaction with our Father. Real faith is a relationship. Relationships aren’t necessarily based on facts. You could show me all the evidence you wanted to prove that my wife is being unfaithful to me and I will tell you, “I’m sorry, but I know her and that isn’t even remotely possible.”
By now, it is probably obvious where I’m headed. Frankly, I don’t care what the evidence of textual criticism seems to say. I’ve been reading my Bible and knowing my Lord for all these years and my heart tells me our traditional reading is correct. My heart tells me the Lord’s Prayer does, in fact, end with exactly these words, “for Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever and ever. Amen.” And frankly that goes for all the other major passages which modern Bibles leave out or tell us, “The best and most reliable manuscripts do not include…”
As I try to study my Bible word for word and even Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic letter for letter, I do take notice of points where there are “variants,” places where all of the thousands of old Bible copies don’t necessarily agree. I do consider the “evidence” of textual criticism. Sometimes I agree with the popular conclusions, and sometimes I don’t. Sometimes their conclusions are blatantly unscientific (remember, theologians make lousy scientists), but I do try to seriously consider what they present. However, I want to always be first and foremost a man of faith, not science. I want to be a man who studies his Bible looking into the eyes of God. We may be able to dissect Shakespeare’s writings like the formaldehyde- soaked frog, but the Bible is not dead. It is a living book, the words of the living God, spoken to His believing children. People who don’t belong to the family can take out their scalpels and slice the Bible all they want, but they’ll never really understand. They’re reading “someone else’s mail.” They’re more than welcome to join the family, but until they do, they’ll never “get it.”
So, there you go. These are the thoughts of a man who spends all day every day in a career based on science, yet who does it all enjoying the face of the God I cannot see – but know.
If you’re a believer, I hope my thoughts are encouraging to you. Your Bible is absolutely trustworthy and please be assured, those major passages that are supposedly “doubtful” are quite genuine and there for you to enjoy, sitting in your Father’s lap, wrapped in His loving arms. And what can we say but,
“For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever. Amen
No comments:
Post a Comment