And it came to pass as he was in a certain place praying, when he ceased, one of his disciples said to him, Lord, teach us to pray, even as John also taught his disciples.
A disciple watches Jesus pray, waits for Him to finish, and asks to be taught the same thing. Two questions sit inside that request: why did men already following Jesus feel unable to pray, and why did they name John the Baptist rather than Moses?
The request grew out of two things: what they saw in Jesus, and what they felt in themselves.
The disciples felt their need of prayer. John taught his disciples to pray, and that stirred them up. They were born of God; but for all that, they lacked power for prayer, their souls were feeble in it. No one prayed like Jesus, and no one depended on His God and Father as He did. No Gospel writer shows this as much as Luke, and so no one shows it in as many different situations.
Just before this, Mary sat at the Lord's feet and listened. The order of the two scenes matters.
If Mary suggests feeding upon the word of God at the feet of Jesus, this points to its effect — it leads to prayer. Our Lord's example in this stirs His disciples to ask to be taught to pray.
The disciple names John, not Moses. The law of Moses set out forms for almost everything, so that choice is worth noticing.
It is characteristic of the law that, with all its forms, no form of prayer was ever prescribed to the people. When the disciples ask for one, they point to John the Baptist as having taught his disciples, and not to Moses. God's people knew their need and had always expressed it, and of course the Old Testament is full of examples. That makes it all the more striking that the law prescribed nothing of the kind. The law was God's schoolmaster, teaching man his weakness, but it did this by demanding strength from him.
John had given his followers words to pray. Something in the Lord's ministry had made those words feel too small.
By asking, they admitted that the Lord's ministry had brought a great advance in spiritual teaching. The old forms of prayer no longer gave John's disciples a way to express all they desired. So he had taught them to pray. John's ministry stirred people up and dealt with the conscience. It did not minister grace as the Lord's ministry did, which spoke of the Father. This was a revelation by the Son, never entrusted to John. So old forms of prayer could not fit such fresh truth. In His answer the Lord agreed, and showed that prayer should match the revelation given to us.
They asked for a lesson. What they lacked was not a method.
They had not learnt the simple confidence in the Father that turns to Him and tells Him everything. They did not understand their place as children of the Father. He stoops to teach them in that condition and gives them this prayer. He teaches them to pray for the things His own heart was taken up with.
The Lord gave this prayer more than once, and the wording is not the same each time. One writer draws a practical warning from that.
In Luke 11 the Lord answered their request, "Lord, teach us to pray," much as He did in Matthew 6, but with slightly different wording and in a shorter form. This prayer comes from the mouth of the Son of God, so it is perfect. Even so, these differences ought to warn us not to make a "fixed form of prayer" out of it. And yet the so-called "Lord's Prayer" has become the most repeated prayer in Christendom.
The Lord's answer does not stop with the words of the prayer.
The Lord next insists on persistence, or perseverance, in prayer, with the blessing attached to earnestness with God. Then He touches on the gift of the Spirit: "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!" He gives not merely good things, but the Holy Spirit, the best gift. They were really disciples; they were born of God, yet they still had to pray for the Holy Spirit to be given to them.
- Example first. Jesus was praying. No one depended on His God and Father as He did, and that example, not a rule, prompted the request.
- Hearing feeds asking. Mary's place at His feet leads straight into this: taking in God's word is what makes a person want to speak to Him.
- Need, not law. The law prescribed no form of prayer; it demanded strength. Prayer rises where people feel weak, so the disciple names John, not Moses.
- Light shapes words. The old forms no longer fitted people who had heard the Son speak of the Father. Prayer should match the revelation given.
- The best gift. The lesson ends not in a formula to recite but in perseverance, and in a Father who gives the Holy Spirit to those who ask.
And he said to them, When ye pray, say, Father, thy name be hallowed; thy kingdom come;
A disciple watched Jesus praying and asked to be taught. Luke's record of the answer is shorter than the one in Matthew. What He gave them starts not with their needs but with God — one word of address, then two desires.
The prayer opens with one word of address. One writer marks how far that word moves beyond the names God's people used before.
Our Lord then directs the disciples to their Father. This is the first and very significant word of the prayer. When believers today address God as Jehovah or Almighty God, do they not forget that they are Christians? People addressed God as Almighty with understanding in the days of Abraham and the patriarchs. They were the days of promise. Later, when God called out the nation of Israel and put it under law, they knew Him as Jehovah-God. Now it is as Father that the Christian knows Him.
Many readers know the longer wording from Matthew and wonder where it went. The answer lies in how copyists worked.
It is true that the King James Bible has it in the matching passage of Luke. But everyone who knows this subject well knows there are strong reasons for cutting the clause there back to the single word "Father." My own conviction is that copyists took the longer form in the common text of Luke from Matthew.
The brevity itself carries a warning against treating the words as a fixed formula:
It is the Spirit of God who has decided this. He gives an outline that matches the moral character of Luke's Gospel. But it is an outline, not meant for repeating word for word, since it has no closing sentence and no "Amen."
A "name" in Scripture is not a label. It stands for everything God has shown Himself to be. So this first thing we ask for lands on the one praying.
"Name" in Scripture always expresses what God is as revealed. So, joined to the Father, it is the truth of what God is in that relationship. So when we long for His name to be hallowed, we are asking that it be kept holy in us, by us, and by all who have the privilege of calling on God by this precious title. We are asking that there be in us an answering response to His holiness in this relationship.
The words ask for a kingdom that belongs to the Father. Writers set it apart from the Son of Man's reign over the earth.
It is not the kingdom of the Son of Man, the kingdom of Christ, that is spoken of here, but the Father's kingdom. It is not "my kingdom come," but "your kingdom come." The Father's kingdom is the sphere where the heavenly saints will shine like the sun. The Son of Man's kingdom is the sphere where all peoples, nations, and languages will serve Him. Heaven and earth will both come under the Lord Jesus when He comes, and both will make up the kingdom of God. But the Father's kingdom is the upper department, and the Son of Man's kingdom is the lower one.
Commentators differ on when that kingdom comes. Some place it beyond the thousand-year reign:
For this kingdom of the Father we must look past every age of God's dealings to the sabbath rest of God Himself. To confuse it with the millennium would be a complete mistake, and would drag its character far down. The millennium, with all its blessedness, is only a step toward this glorious completion.
We do not naturally pray in this order.
How often we put ourselves and our interests first in our prayers. It was not like this that the Lord taught His disciples. He taught them to put God first: to pray that His name might be hallowed, and then to stretch their desires out to the furthest bounds of the earth… Only then, when the heart has reached up to the sacred glory of God's name and has widened to take in every home of man, may we ask for our daily needs.
These desires are not only for a future day. They can shape a life now.
In a coming day of persecution and distress God's earthly people will cry this prayer from their anguished hearts, but how blessed if we are in the moral good and truth of it now.
- Father — The first word fixes the relationship. Not Almighty, as with Abraham. Not Jehovah, as under the law. Father — the name Christians know God by.
- Fewer words — Luke's short form is the true text. Copyists carried the longer address over from Matthew. It is an outline for prayer, not a formula to recite.
- Name — "Name" means all God has revealed Himself to be. To ask that it be hallowed is to ask that His holiness find an answer in us.
- Kingdom — We ask past the Son of Man's rule over the earth for the Father's own kingdom. Commentators differ on what that is: the heavenly side of Christ's reign, or the eternal rest beyond it.
- Order — God's name, then God's kingdom, then our bread. Pray in that order, and you stop putting yourself first.
give us our needed bread for each day;
Jesus has just taught His disciples to pray for the Father's name and kingdom. Now He turns to something as ordinary as a loaf of bread. That shift raises three questions. How much may we ask for? How often? And why does God feed us in small instalments instead of all at once?
The request for bread does not open the prayer. Commentators see meaning in that order:
Short, yet suggestive! Short, because it packs so much into a few sentences. Suggestive, because it reminds us that God's glory, and what concerns our Father, should have the first place in the heart. At the same time, we are perfectly free to make our wants known as well.
The English word "daily" is a weak stand-in for the Greek word behind it.
Then comes a petition expressing dependence on God for our ordinary need. "Give us our needed bread for each day." It takes up the pure and simple need of the body. The word "daily" is a very imperfect expression in English of the original term. The Greek word epiousios really means our "sufficient" bread. It seems to be a word made for this very idea, set against having more than we need. If we ask for more than enough, we slight the wisdom of the Lord.
The same writer links this request to contentment.
Give us today our sufficient (or, necessary) bread. So the disciples are taught to begin by confessing dependence for ordinary wants, as the apostle called us to be content with food and clothing.
Matthew records "this day." Luke records "day by day" — the ESV renders it "each day." Kelly sees a change of outlook behind the change of words:
The believing Jews looked simply at the one day, it might be, before them. It was a definite request for the present need... But in Luke the Lord was teaching the Gentile believer — the one who is not a Jew. That believer shows a more constant spirit of dependence: "day by day" is the word. He was never to expect rest or a settled home on earth, as the Jewish believer might. His inheritance lay elsewhere; his portion here was to be always that of a stranger... The word for "give" is the same verb in both Gospels, but its form and force differ a little. In Matthew it implies a single passing act; in Luke it is the continuous habit, which naturally goes with the phrase "day by day."
Commentators differ on how far this request reaches. Kelly takes it as the plain need of the body. Others point to the manna, the bread God gave Israel in the desert, and hold that the request cannot stop at the body:
It is not straining the request for daily bread to make it include a spiritual application too. With the Lord it would be simply impossible, while remembering the need of the body, to forget the immensely greater need of the soul. In both ways the supply must be continual. The manna had to be fresh every morning, and freshly gathered as the morning came: hoarded, it bred worms and went bad.
God could settle our needs once and for all. Grant explains why He does not:
Often all we think of is having our need met; but how little a thing is that with God! It would cost Him nothing, we may say, to meet the need of a lifetime in a moment. A lesser love than His would supply it all at once and be rid of a constant burden. But that is not His way. To supply the need is a small thing. But He means to supply it in a way that makes us feel, in each supply that comes just in time, that the Father's eye is never turned away from us and the Father's heart is always taken up with us.
Praying this way exposes where we really look for security.
"Give us this day our daily bread." Many a believer would almost break his heart if he thought his income would come to an end in twelve months' time. But this prayer means we look to Him as our only resource for today's needs.
- Order: God's name and kingdom come first, then our wants. We are still perfectly free to bring those wants.
- Enough: The word behind "daily" means sufficient. God teaches us to ask for what we need, not for more.
- Daily: Luke's "day by day" is a habit, not a single request — the outlook of a stranger whose inheritance is elsewhere.
- Fresh: Like the manna, the supply must keep coming. Hoarded provision spoils. God feeds body and soul alike.
- Love: God could meet a lifetime's need in a moment. He gives it day by day so we feel the Father's eye and heart on us.
and remit us our sins, for we also remit to every one indebted to us; and lead us not into temptation.
The disciples had asked to be taught to pray, and this verse gives two requests for the soul: pardon and protection. But whose forgiveness is in view, does forgiving others earn God's pardon, and how could God lead anyone into temptation?
The people the Lord was teaching were already His followers. So they are not asking for the pardon that settles a person's standing before God. They ask for the pardon a Father gives His own children when they fail.
This is not a sinner's forgiveness, when he first comes to know the Lord. It is the forgiveness of the disciple living under the daily government of his Father. How misleading, then, to make an unconverted person ask forgiveness as if he were already a child of God! Under the gospel, the unconverted receive forgiveness of sins by faith in the blood of Jesus — by receiving the gospel itself. This passage speaks only of a child's forgiveness: the removal of whatever gets in the way of fellowship with God.
Applied to someone not yet converted, this prayer would make pardon depend on his own conduct.
Does God make the forgiveness of an unconverted man depend, in any sort or degree, upon his forgiveness of others? By no means. That would demand a very high standard of conduct from a person in the lowest possible condition... In a word, it would ruin and deny the gospel, which would then be of works and no more grace.
Matthew's account of this prayer uses a different word, and the change is worth noticing.
If in Matthew it is said "debts" and in Luke "sins," there is a slight shade of difference that ought not to pass unnoticed. "Sin" says plainly how deep the soul's moral need is. The simplest non-Jew would understand the word "sin." A Jew would feel what a debt was in his responsibility to God. It assumes a known relationship — one he already stood in, and in which he had failed. To those who had never stood in that position, the idea of "debt" was not so clear... "Debt" is more of a picture, though a Jew understood it perfectly.
The next words tie how I treat people to how God deals with me day by day.
That means our attitude to others has a serious bearing on ourselves. No doubt this passage looks at forgiveness from the standpoint of God's government. And it is exactly on those lines of government that the matter becomes very serious. Do I forgive? Then I can call upon God to forgive me. Am I hard and unforgiving? I shall reap what I sow.
Knowing your own debt is cancelled does not make you casual about wrongdoing. It makes you gentle with others who fail.
God counts no sin against us now; it is all put away. But will that make me hard when others fail? No. Seeing that Christ went through agony on the cross for me gives me a sense of my freedom, but not indifference about sin. Instead of hardness, it will give us tenderness and softness of spirit.
God never tempts anyone to do wrong, so the word here means something else: being tested and put to the proof.
The disciples knew their own weakness, so they were right to ask God not to lead them into such severely testing circumstances. No prayer such as "Lead us not into sin" is or could be in the Bible, for that would charge God with moral evil. The temptation here means putting a person fully to the proof. If there is evil in the heart that has never been judged, the test brings it out to his shame.
This prayer comes from knowing yourself, and Christ's prayer for Peter shows what happens without it.
Whoever knows himself will pray, "Lead us not into temptation." May the grace of God work in us so that Satan need not sift us to strip away our pretensions. When Jesus prayed for Peter, whom He knew to be self-confident, He did not ask that His disciple escape the enemy's sifting, but only that his faith should not fail.
Luke's account ends without the closing line found in Matthew, and the oldest copies support that.
The most ancient copies leave out "Deliver us from evil"... This is not taking anything away from Scripture; it is laying aside what is not Scripture. We still have these words, and rightly, in Matthew: leaving them out here is a gain, not a loss.
- Family, not court. A child asks his Father to clear away what spoils daily fellowship. This is not a stranger asking to be let off forever.
- Plain word. Luke writes "sins" where Matthew writes "debts." A debt assumes a known relationship already failed. "Sin" names the moral need in words anyone understands.
- Mirror clause. How I treat those who owe me sets the measure of God's daily dealings with me. Forgive, and I can ask forgiveness. Stay hard, and I reap what I sow.
- Softened, not slack. Knowing my own guilt is gone makes me tender toward those who fail, never careless about wrong.
- Sifting, not sin. God tempts no one to evil. The prayer asks Him to keep us out of tests that would expose hidden weakness — the prayer a self-confident heart never thinks to pray.
And he said to them, Who among you shall have a friend, and shall go to him at midnight and say to him, Friend, let me have three loaves,
The disciples had just asked to be taught how to pray. The Lord answers with a scene: a man at a friend's door at midnight, asking for bread. Two hard questions follow. Why keep asking a God who already knows? And does persistence really move Him?
The Lord argues for prayer from the way one person feels toward another.
Here the Lord presses prayer on us. He argues (as He often does in Luke) from what the human heart feels. That shows even more strongly what God feels when men are earnest with Him.
The request in the story is not vague. It names one thing, and the man sticks to it.
In the first place, it teaches us to be definite in our prayers. "Friend, lend me three loaves." There is a real need, felt and spoken out. One thing is before his mind and on his heart, and he keeps to that one thing. It is not a long, rambling, aimless statement about all sorts of things. It is clear, direct, and pointed — I want three loaves, I cannot do without them, I must have them, I have no other way to get them, the case is urgent, it is the middle of the night. Every circumstance makes the appeal definite and earnest.
Everything about the hour argues against asking. He asks anyway.
Midnight, of course, seems a very bad time to come. Everything looks discouraging. The friend has retired for the night, the door is shut, his children are with him in bed, he cannot rise. All this is very depressing. But he still presses his definite need: he must have the three loaves.
Two things matter here: the men are friends, and something more than friendship opens the door.
Suppose a man has a friend — not just a neighbour. An emergency comes, and at midnight he goes to ask him for three loaves of bread. Would that friend excuse himself from helping because it would disturb his own comfort? The Lord answered that friendship alone might not move the friend to help at that hour. Yet because of the man's persistence — his earnest insistence in asking — his friend will respond (v.8).
Persistence in prayer is not selfish. Because God is gracious, we may press Him for others as well as for ourselves.
If we have learnt that He is gracious, He wants us to act on that knowledge. He wants us to go to Him with expectancy and persistence — whether for the blessing of others (11:5-10) or for our own deliverance (18:1-7).
Commentators differ on what the man's persistence teaches about God. One says the gap between God and man must never stop us asking.
So the Lord shows us that we may keep on seeking. We may seek with persistence, as one needy man seeks from another. Someone may object, You are forgetting the difference between God and man. There is a difference, indeed. But we must not let it stop us from pouring out our full hearts to Him... Ask as if He would give in to sheer persistence. Cling to Him as Jacob clung, and say, "I will not let you go unless you bless me."
Another presses the contrast. The man at midnight had selfishness in him to overcome; God does not, so a delay must have another cause.
There is no reluctance in God. There is no selfishness to be overcome, as there was in the man at midnight. But there may be reasons to delay the answer. When it does come, it may come in a way you are hardly prepared for.
The lesson is meant to reshape how believers pray in company, not only alone.
We believe it would bring great earnestness, freshness, warmth, depth, reality, and power to our prayer-meetings if we came with something definite on our hearts, which we could invite our fellow believers to join us in. Some of us think we must make one long prayer about all sorts of things. Many of them are very right and very good, no doubt. But the mind gets lost in the number of subjects. How much better to bring one object before the throne, earnestly urge it, and pause, so that the Holy Spirit may lead out others in the same way.
- Empty — the man asks because he has nothing and cannot do without the loaves; prayer starts with an admitted lack.
- Definite — "three loaves" is the model. Name one urgent need, not a wandering list of good subjects.
- Late — midnight, a shut door, children in bed. Every circumstance says don't ask, and he asks anyway.
- Persistent — friendship alone did not move the sleeping friend. Persistence did. So cling like Jacob and refuse to let go.
- Unlike — commentators differ on how far the picture runs. One says to ask as if persistence itself wins. Another says God has no reluctance at all, so a delay has a better reason.
since a friend of mine on a journey is come to me, and I have nothing to set before him;
A man wakes his neighbour at midnight, and the reason is not his own hunger — a traveller has arrived and there is no food in the house. Everything turns on that: the need belongs to someone else, and the man asking has nothing to meet it.
In the prayer the Lord had just taught, "Give us" covers the asker's own need. This story moves a step further out, to a need that is not his own at all.
But this is not all. We may not stop at the supply of our own need; God encourages us to come to Him about others. The prayer "Give us" has been answered and my own need has been met. But the case of "a friend of mine" who "has arrived on a journey," along with my own poverty and inability to help him, presses heavily on my spirit. It stirs up earnestness, persistence, and steady prayer that does not give up.
The man is not weighing options. He has a demand on him and no way to meet it. That is what makes him refuse to leave.
He tells us that the man gets what he came for by sheer persistent earnestness. He will not be put off; he must get the three loaves. Persistence wins even where the claims of friendship fail. The man is set on his object; he has no alternative. There is a demand, and he has nothing to meet it — "I have nothing to set before my travelling friend." In short, he will not take no for an answer.
Notice how short the request is.
First, it teaches us to be definite in our prayers. "Friend, lend me three loaves." A real need is felt and put into words. One thing is before his mind and on his heart, and he keeps to that one thing. It is not a long, rambling, aimless statement about all sorts of things. It is clear, direct, and pointed — I want three loaves, I cannot do without them, I must have them, I am shut in, the case is urgent, the time of night. Every circumstance makes the appeal definite and earnest.
Behind the boldness lies a settled conviction. Two facts overrule everything that would hold a person back: he is my friend, and he has the bread.
In the man who went to his friend at midnight, the Lord pictures how prayer begins: with the sense that my friend has what I want. The question is not so much what the need is. I know my friend has what I want, and I know he is my friend. So I go to him to relieve my need, without counting up the various things that might get in the way. One thing is fixed in my mind — he has what I want, and I have nowhere else to get it. This is the first great sense of prayer: complete dependence on God, and His infinite ability to meet what I need.
The story uses a reluctant sleeper, but the point is contrast, not likeness.
It is not, blessed be God, that He will ever answer us "from within." He will never say to us, "Do not bother me. I cannot get up and give you anything." He is always our true and ready "Friend" — a cheerful, generous Giver who does not scold. All praise to His holy name!
Commentators differ on how much weight to put on persistence. Mackintosh stresses it. Bellett presses the contrast further and explains delay another way:
There is no reluctance in God. He has none of the selfishness that had to be overcome in the man at midnight. But there may be reasons to delay the answer, and when it does come, it may come in a way you are little prepared for.
The Lord argues from the lower case to the higher — if a grudging man gets up, what will God do?
And the Lord illustrates it even from man, evil as he is, and though the appeal comes at midnight, when the difficulties were greatest. Even then the need was urgent and there was nothing to meet it. And a mere man does not fail to get up and give — not for friendship's sake, sad to say, but because the asking would not stop. How much more should the believer count on God!
- The demand. A traveller arrives and there is nothing in the house. The prayer starts from someone else's need, not the asker's own.
- The emptiness. He has no alternative and no resource, and that is why he will not take no for an answer.
- The request. Three loaves — definite, brief, one thing named and held to.
- The confidence. He goes because his friend has what he lacks and he has nowhere else to get it.
- The contrast. The neighbour gives because the asking will not stop. God never says "do not bother me" — so how much more will He give?
and he within answering should say, Do not disturb me; the door is already shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise up to give [it] thee?
Late at night a man knocks on a friend's door. His cupboard is empty and a guest has arrived. The voice inside answers with reasons. Is this how God meets us when we come to Him in need?
The man's reasons are all about himself.
And what answer is sure to come back from the one who speaks "from within"? Just what you would expect. "Do not bother me." This man has withdrawn into the narrow circle of his own comfort and enjoyment. He has closed his door and drawn the curtains around him. He does not like to be "troubled" by anyone. Such a man is sure to say, even when someone appeals to him as a "friend," "I cannot get up." And why could he not get up? Because "the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed." His reasons for not getting up were all selfish. And when he did get up, it was only from a selfish wish to avoid more trouble.
Friendship is named at the door, but friendship is not what opens it.
The time may seem as inconvenient as could be. A man may not listen for friendship's sake to the one who asks to borrow bread. Still, he would rather get up and give than open himself to trouble. Everyone knows this is how a man tends to act with a neighbour who is bold enough to press him. He may be deeply annoyed at the caller who keeps knocking. But to avoid the trouble of a continued appeal at his door, he gives in.
Can the man in bed stand for God? One writer answers by pointing to where the comparison breaks down.
Can we apply this to God? Not the motive, of course: God does not give to get rid of the person asking. Even so, the Lord goes on: "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."
God never answers like that man. Still, He encourages us to keep asking:
Thank God, He will never answer us "from within." He will never say to us, "Do not bother me" — "I cannot get up and give you anything." He is always our true and ready "Friend." He is a cheerful, generous Giver who does not scold. All praise to His holy name! Still, He encourages persistence, and we need to weigh His teaching.
If God is not reluctant, the delay must serve some other purpose. One writer reads the wait as God's timing rather than His unwillingness.
There is majesty in God's goodness, and yet He takes notice of all our needs, and we must wait for His will and pleasure. Suppose a child asks his father for something. The father says, "You must wait five minutes." Is the child to say, "No, I cannot; I must have it right now?" Meanwhile the waiting exercises faith, and breaks down the spirit in the sense of need. Look at Daniel, and see another thing. God gave him a deep sense of being identified with Himself in what he was doing; so He made him pray three weeks before he received what he asked for. This is a great privilege, because it means fellowship with God. There is a certainty that God will answer in blessing, even though He delays.
The man at the door asks for one thing and keeps to it.
It teaches us to be definite in our prayers. "Friend, lend me three loaves." He feels a real need and says it. One thing is before his mind and on his heart, and he limits himself to that one thing. It is not a long, rambling, aimless statement about all sorts of things. It is clear, direct, and pointed: I want three loaves. I cannot do without them. I must have them. I am stuck. The case is urgent.
The habit behind that shut door is ours too, and Christ is its complete opposite.
We do not like to be interrupted when we have withdrawn from the world around us into the narrow circle of our own personal or family enjoyment. We are all too ready, when a call comes, to send our answer "from within." How unlike all this was the blessed Lord Jesus Christ! His door was never shut. He never answered "from within." He always had a ready response to every needy person who came. He was so taken up with human need that He had no time to eat bread or take rest. He never complained about the constant interruption of needy humanity. He never said to any child of need or sorrow, "I cannot get up and give you anything." The door of His heart was always wide open.
- The door. "Do not bother me" is the sound of a heart closed for the night — every excuse true, every excuse about self.
- The contrast. God never speaks from behind that door. He does not give just to be rid of us.
- The delay. A closed door is His timing, not His unwillingness. Waiting exercises faith and brings fellowship with Him.
- The asking. Three loaves, named and repeated: definite need makes persistent prayer.
- The mirror. Christ's door was never shut. He never answered from within — ours is the door that closes.
-- I say to you, Although he will not get up and give [them] to him because he is his friend, because of his shamelessness, at any rate, he will rise and give him as many as he wants.
At midnight a man wakes his neighbour to ask for bread, and the neighbour gets up — not out of friendship, but to stop the knocking. The Lord turns this grudging giver into a lesson on prayer, so is God like him, or unlike him?
What moves the sleeper is not politeness. Where the ESV says "impudence", older translations say "importunity" — and one writer explains what that word really means:
By the illustration He uses, He encourages them to earnestness, and even "shamelessness" — which is what the word for "importunity" really means. He points to the gift of the Holy Spirit as the Father's purpose for those who ask Him.
Read that way, the man wins because he refuses to feel ashamed. One commentator describes the ordinary human transaction the Lord is drawing on:
The time may seem ever so inconvenient, but although a man may not listen for friendship's sake to the one asking for a loan of bread, he would rather get up and give than expose himself to trouble. Everyone knows this is how a man tends to act with a neighbour who is bold enough to press him. He might be thoroughly annoyed at the persistent caller, but to avoid the trouble of a continued appeal at his door, he gives in.
Before persistence comes precision. Notice how small and clear the man's request is:
In the first place, it teaches us to be definite in our prayers. "Friend, lend me three loaves." There is a real need felt and expressed; there is one thing before the mind and on the heart, and he keeps to that one thing. It is not a long, rambling, aimless statement about all sorts of things. It is clear, direct, and pointed — I want three loaves, I cannot do without them, I must have them, I have no other way, the case is urgent.
These two qualities go together. Vague praying does not press for an answer:
There is a sad lack of persistence in our prayer meetings. The lack of persistence matches the lack of definiteness. The two go very much together. Where the thing sought is as definite as the "three loaves," there will generally be the persistent asking for it, and the firm purpose to get it.
This is where the comparison gets uncomfortable. One writer refuses to smooth it over:
The devil uses many arguments against keeping up prayers that seem to fail, and our own hearts agree with them because they sound plausible. Yet if there is nothing more than this against such prayers, the Lord teaches us here to press them still. The parallel between persistence with man and with God is as hard to apply fully, and as open to serious objection, as any parallel one could suggest. The Lord Himself points to the difficulty, while pressing the argument as if there were none... Can we apply this to God? Certainly not the motive: God does not give to be rid of the petitioner.
The shut door is the real contrast. One writer sets it against how the Lord Himself received people:
How unlike all this was the blessed Lord Jesus Christ! His door was never shut. He never answered "from within." He had no time to eat bread or take rest, He was so occupied with human need... He never said to any son of want or child of sorrow, "I cannot rise and give you anything." He was ready to get up and go with every needy applicant, and His gracious word was always "Give."
If God is willing, delay needs another explanation. One writer finds it in what waiting does to the one praying:
There is majesty in God's goodness, and yet He takes notice of all our needs, and we must wait for His will and pleasure. Suppose someone asks his father for something, and the father says, "You must wait five minutes." Is the child to say, "No, I cannot; I must have it right away"? Waiting exercises faith, and it breaks the spirit down into a sense of need... There is a certainty that God will answer in blessing, though He delays.
Commentators differ in emphasis. One writer warns against treating persistence as pressure on God:
Never say that persistence is needed to move God... There is no reluctance in God; there is not the selfishness to be overcome that there was in the man at midnight. But there may be reasons for delaying the answer, and when it comes, it may come in a way you are little prepared for.
The argument runs upward, from the worse case to the better:
The need was urgent, and there was nothing to meet it. Even so, a mere man does get up and give — not for friendship's sake, sad to say, but because of persistence. How much more should the believer count on God!... God gives to all life and breath and everything; it is His nature.
- Shameless — the word here means shamelessness: the caller keeps knocking and refuses to feel ashamed.
- Definite — "three loaves" is the model: one clear need, felt as urgent, held before God without wandering.
- Contrasted — the sleeper gives to be rid of the caller. God never gives for that reason: His door was never shut.
- Delayed — waiting is not refusal. Waiting exercises faith and deepens our sense of need, and the answer will come, though perhaps in a form we did not expect.
- Greater — if a grudging man rises at midnight, how much more will God give, since giving is His nature.
And *I* say to you, Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you.
The Lord says this right after telling of a man who bangs on a friend's door at midnight, and each of His three commands carries a promise. Why are the promises sure, and why does God ask us to keep pressing when He already knows the need?
There is a secret to asking rightly, and the three verbs are not one request said three times.
The way to ask rightly is the secret shown in John 15:7. "If you abide in me" — a life of dependence — "and my words abide in you" — they shape us and produce right desires — "ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you." This matches Psalm 37:4: if I am delighting in the Lord, right desires will be created in me. To neglect the word of God is to neglect the true safeguard... "Ask" implies something I want to have; "seek," something I have lost; and "knock," wanting to get in. It means increased earnestness. There is more intensity in "seeking" than in "asking," and again more in "knocking" than in seeking.
A grudging man gives in at midnight. What then will God do, whose nature is to give?
The Lord illustrates it even from man, evil as he is. The appeal comes at midnight, when difficulties were greatest. Yet even then the need was urgent and nothing was there to meet it. A mere man still gets up and gives — not out of friendship, sad to say, but because of persistence. How much more should the believer count on God! "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you." God gives to all life and breath and all things; it is His nature.
If God is already willing, why press Him at all? And who may come?
This is a clear climax, and it all leads to urgent prayer before God. Not that God needs it — man does. God values the earnestness of man's heart, though His own heart is open to the cry of need or distress from the very first... In Luke there is always an appeal to the feelings of the heart. Man admits what even he would do, and that illustrates the ways of God, which are far more admirable. There is also a breadth that goes far beyond the narrow bounds of Israel. "Everyone who asks receives."
The promise is open. So what holds it back?
There is no limit, except the limit that little faith may put on it. There is also a safeguard on God's side, which is not a limit: that the gift be good. And the Lord fastens His encouragements twice over: everyone who asks receives, he who seeks finds, and the door opens to him who knocks. What a door this opens for us, and what blessing it makes possible! How rich we may all be, if we only will be!... And yet the apostle's words could apply even in the fresh early days when he wrote them: "You do not have, because you do not ask. You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions" (James 4:2-3).
Silence is the real test of this verse. What if the answer does not come for years?
The Lord may keep us waiting ever so long and yet intend all the time to grant the request at last. Delay may be meant to make the blessing greater when it comes. We are inclined to think that delay means denial; it is not always so... I remember a good man and his wife who prayed twelve years for their unconverted son. At the end of that time he turned up, clothed and in his right mind, and that in answer to many prayers.
Someone will object that God is not a man, so pressing Him makes no sense.
So the Lord shows us that we may keep on seeking. Seek without letting up. Seek as one needy man seeks from another. Someone might argue, You are forgetting the difference between God and man. There is a difference, indeed. But we are not to use it to stop pouring out our full hearts to Him... Ask as if He would yield to sheer persistence. Cling to Him as Jacob clung, and say, "I will not let You go, unless You bless me."
- Ask — the plainest word in the verse: something you want and do not have. Every child knows how.
- Seek — asking that has met silence and keeps going. Delay is not denial: one couple prayed twelve years for their son, and he came home.
- Knock — asking that has become insistent, like the man at the midnight door who will not go away. God values that earnestness, though He never needed convincing.
- Everyone — the promise names no nation, no qualification, no exception. Whoever asks, receives.
- One limit — small faith on our side. God's care that the gift is good is a safeguard, not a limit. Ask wrongly, to spend it on yourself, and the door stays shut.
For every one that asks receives; and he that seeks finds; and to him that knocks it will be opened.
Verse 10 repeats the promise of verse 9 in a wider form: what Jesus said to His disciples now holds for everyone. It follows the parable of the neighbour who knocked at midnight, and it answers the question that story raises: why expect God to respond at all?
The word "for" shows that Jesus is giving a reason, not just repeating Himself. One writer traces that reason past the parable to God's own nature.
And the Lord illustrates it even from man, evil as he is. He pictures a man appealing at midnight, when difficulties were greatest. Even then the need was urgent and there was nothing to meet it, yet a mere man still gets up and gives. He does it not for friendship's sake, sadly, but because of persistence. How much more should the believer count on God! God gives to all life and breath and everything; it is His nature.
Asking, seeking and knocking are not three names for the same thing. Each carries its own weight.
"Ask" is found in various places in the Word of God as a special form of prayer (for example John 11:22; 14:13; Col. 1:9; Jas. 1:5). "Seek" is the upright, earnest effort to find something (see Psa. 34:4; Is. 55:6). "Knock" shows that outward obstacles and shyness can be overcome as well.
The three words rise in strength. That rise is for the times when the answer does not come.
"Ask" — every child knows how to do that. It is simply laying the need before the Father. But suppose the answer does not come; there is a delay. What then? "Seek" — there is something more there. "Knock" — it grows in persistence and urgency. We need to listen to these things from His lips.
The verse names no nation and no class. One writer finds this breadth all through Luke's Gospel.
In Luke there is always an appeal to the feelings of the heart. Luke takes man's own admission of what even he would do and uses it to illustrate the ways of God, which are infinitely more admirable and excellent. There is also a breadth here that goes far beyond the narrow boundaries of Israel. "Everyone who asks receives." So here we have the call to persistence in prayer, and the certainty of God's answer.
If everyone who asks receives, does that mean God says yes to everything we ask? One writer ties the promise to the Father Jesus had just taught them to address.
The Lord had instructed His disciples to address God as Father. The assurances He gave in verse 10 fit with this, and so do the statements of verses 11-13. The Father in heaven is not to be thought of as less interested and considerate than an earthly father. He will not give what is useless or harmful in answer to requests for necessary food. Nor, we may add, will He give what is useless or harmful if we foolishly want it and ask for it. Many an unanswered prayer is, no doubt, explained by this.
The parable works by contrast as much as by likeness. The neighbour gave the food to end the noise.
This man's request seemed unreasonable. It was a strange hour for a guest to arrive, and the friend thought it was too much trouble to provide food for him. For friendship's sake he would do nothing; he gave because of the man's persistence. He thought, "If I don't give him what he wants he will knock all night." But it is not so with our Father, who always delights to give.
Waiting is not the same as refusal. The same writer warns against reading a delay the wrong way.
The Lord may keep us waiting a very long time and yet intend all along to grant the request at last. Delay may be meant to make the blessing greater when it comes. We are inclined to think that delay means denial; it is not always so.
- Because — the "for" grounds prayer not in our persistence but in God's character: giving is His nature.
- Everyone — the promise sets no boundary of nation or class; it reaches far past the bounds of Israel.
- Everyone who asks — the promise rests on asking, seeking and knocking, three actions that rise in earnestness.
- Everyone who asks receives — but a Father who loves will not hand over what is useless or harmful, even when we want it.
- Keep knocking — the neighbour gave to stop the noise; the Father delights to give, so a delay need not mean denial.