Should "for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever" be included in the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:13)?

This is followed by a model for prayer which the King now gives. This prayer is generally called throughout Christendom "the Lord's prayer." Where is the authority in Scripture to call it by this name? If any prayer can be called the Lord's prayer it certainly is the one contained in John 17. It is not the Lord's prayer, but the disciples' prayer. This model for prayer has become the formal prayer, the ritualistic prayer of every sect in Christendom. That which our Lord forbids, vain repetitions, is practiced with this divine model by those who call themselves Christians. In the Roman and Greek Churches , so-called, it becomes a good work to repeat so many "Our Fathers," and the poor deceived souls expect blessing in this world and in eternity from the mechanical repetition of so many prayers. This of course is very little different from the prayer machines of Thibet, upon which a certain number of prayers written on paper are placed and unwound before some god or goddess. In "evangelical" denominations it is not much better. We remember well in childhood, being strictly brought up in the Lutheran denomination, how constantly this prayer was used. In sickness, in pain, in danger, at mealtime, in the morning and at night, in severe storms, etc., it was ever repeated as if a miraculous power indwelt these words sufficient to dispel sickness, deliver from danger and bring blessing which otherwise would not come. It is one of the rags which Luther brought away from the old Roman sepulchre. Yet it is the same in other denominations. In one of the strongest it is used at the burial of the dead, sprinkling of infants, Lord's supper, "ordination" of deacons and elders, "consecration" of bishops, and it is repeated in public by the congregation. All this practice, the use of this model for prayer, as the Lord's prayer given to the Church, to be used by the Church, is wrong, decidedly unchristian, nor can it be proven from the New Testament that it is intended for the Church. In the Acts of the Apostles we read of the breaking of bread, the gifts of the Spirit, the assembly of believers, the baptism of believers, but do we read anywhere in the divinely inspired record of the beginning of the Church that the so-called Lord's prayer was used by the apostles or by the primitive church? Is there a hint anywhere in the New Testament that the prayer is to be repeated in public and used by believers? Not even the faintest hint that this should be so, but many strong proofs and arguments that it should not be so. Centuries passed before it became a settled custom to make the prayer the King gave to His Jewish disciples the prayer for Christians and to use it in the form and in the way it is used now. An unknown hand then added something to the last petition, "Deliver us from the evil one." The words, "for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever -- Amen," are an interpolation. They do not belong into your Bibles, for the Lord never uttered them. The revised version (though so imperfect in many of its revisions) has done well in omitting them altogether. When it was decided to use this model for prayer as a prayer, this ending was written by some one and added to it and thus making it a prayer with the "Amen" attached to it. No such "amen" belongs there.

I do not enter into the doxology which concludes the prayer in the received text of St. Matthew; for while everybody agrees in leaving it out of St. Luke, it is well known that its authority, even in the other Gospel, is, to say the least, doubtful. Probably it was an accretion derived from ecclesiastical usage in the fourth century, or perhaps earlier. Chrysostom comments on the doxology without a note of distrust; but previously to him not a trace of it appears in any exposition or citation, in either the East or the West. It would appear that the prayer began to be, or at least was, spoken of in the third century as "oratio legitima et ordinaria." But this seems scarcely to have been the case in the days of Justin Martyr,* who speaks of the ruler offering up prayer and thanksgiving ὅση δύναμις αὐτῳ (that is, I presume, extempore). But I trust I have shown that which we started with — the special suitability of the prayer to the class with which our Lord was thus dealing. I do not go farther now; for the question of His will, as regards later times, must be inquired into before I have done. But it is well to bear in mind, that, everlastingly true as is every word which our Lord spoke, we have to take care that all be rightly divided and applied. I yield to none in reverent admiration of the most sublime and the most pregnant form of prayer ever written. The question nevertheless remains, not of its intrinsic value, but of its due and intended use after redemption and the descent of the Holy Ghost.

Several verses or parts of verses have been entirely rejected. The first of these is what is commonly termed the doxology of the "Lord's prayer:" "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." This has created much feeling in certain ecclesiastical quarters — as was to be expected; but there need to be no hesitation in accepting the exclusion on the ground of entirely insufficient evidence of its inspiration. No Christian would dispute the truth of the language; but the only question to be decided was, Is it a part of the inspired word of God?

Several verses or parts of verses have been entirely rejected. The first of these is what is commonly termed the doxology of the "Lord's prayer:" "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." This has created much feeling in certain ecclesiastical quarters — as was to be expected; but there need to be no hesitation in accepting the exclusion on the ground of entirely insufficient evidence of its inspiration. No Christian would dispute the truth of the language; but the only question to be decided was, Is it a part of the inspired word of God?

The prayer of verses 9 to 13 is not therefore merely to be repeated word for word. The Lord gives this as an outline of prayer from the viewpoint of the kingdom. He does not say "pray these words," but "after this manner therefore pray ye." This is further confirmed too by the fact that the expression added at the end ("for thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory forever and ever Amen") is not found in the Most Greek Manuscripts, but has evidently been interjected by some copyist who thought this would be a good ending for a prayer.

The prayer has three sections. The first is connected with Gods glory, the second with Gods authority, the last with God's Mercy. In our prayers it is wise to keep this in mind: our blessing is not the most important thing, but God's glory. Secondly, let our prayers be always subject to His authority; then His mercy to us has its proper and precious place.

The prayer the Lord taught (vs.2-4) corresponds to Matthew 6:9-13 and whether it is the same occasion or not, Luke omits some expressions that Matthew includes, making Luke's record quite brief in comparison. It is the Spirit of God who has decided this, giving an outline here morally suitable for the Gospel of Luke, but it is an outline, not intended to be repeated verbally, for there is no closing sentence and no "Amen" included. In fact, even in Matthew the closing sentence, "For Thine is the power...." in the KJV is only an addition by a copyist, for it is not found in the earliest and best manuscripts.

First, God's primacy (our Father) is affirmed, yet in gracious relationship with us. "Hallowed be Your name" is next, which speaks of His dignity as sanctified from all others. Then the desire for His full divine authority is expressed in "Your kingdom come." This is the Father's kingdom, not that of the Son of Man in the millennial reign, but the giving up of the kingdom into the hand of the Father (1Cor.15:24) when the millennium is completed.

But deliver us from evil in general, if not from the evil one in particular. This was not the sifting, or temptation, deprecated in the clause before, which grace may put us through for good, as we see in Peter; but the power of the enemy in drawing into sin against God. The proper desire was to be kept from the evil, or, if one fell, to be restored from it. Grace in no case fails, if a disciple alas! did. Deliver us from evil.

The doxology is an ecclesiastical accretion and therefore uninspired. Luke was led by the Holy Spirit to omit the special title (2), the earthly Kingdom (3), and the final clause (7), as not so much called for in the case of Gentiles.

We have already remarked upon, And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors, so that there only remains, And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. This cry will always be suited to us while in this world with the sense of utter weakness, and knowing that we could not stand for one moment in temptation if left to ourselves. Nor is there any incongruity between such a petition and entire confidence in God; for there will be confidence in God just in proportion as we have learned that in our flesh there dwelleth no good thing. Afraid of ourselves, we shall ever cry, Lead us not into temptation, and this will lead to the further desire that we may be delivered from evil. This, indeed, was the request of the Lord Himself for His own — "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil." (John 17:15.) Whether the remaining words, the doxology, as it is termed, For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen, be part of Scripture or not, they undoubtedly express truth that all Christians delight to acknowledge and to turn into praise.

Was the Lord's prayer meant to be a model or a form? Scarcely the latter, for then we should be obliged to ask which form we should use, seeing that in Luke 11 the prayer is given more briefly than in Matt. 6 (see Revised Version). Moreover, the fact that the Lord has left the prayer in what some would consider an unfinished state has led to the unauthorised addition of the words "for Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen," in order to render it suitable for congregational use. We suggest therefore that the Lord intended no more than a model of prayer for His disciples.

But more than this: probably Mr. Innes's military education has given him little opportunity for critical enquiry; nor is this any blame if he attends to what is more important; but if he had attended to it, he would know that the superstition as to the Lord's prayer has led to the interpolation of Luke, in order to assimilate him to Matthew, and that in fact we have two Lord's prayers, both assuredly perfect in their place, and given by inspiration. The prayer in Luke really runs thus: "Our Father, Thy name be hallowed; Thy kingdom come; give our needed bread for each day; and remit us our sins, for we also remit to every one indebted to us; and lead us not into temptation." Now, for the purpose for which the Holy Ghost gives this version of it here, I believe this to be perfect, and for that for which it is given in Matthew it is perfect there: only there too "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever," has been added from ecclesiastical use of it, and is interpolated. But this makes sad havoc of its use as a prescribed formulary; for which are we to use, Luke's Lord's prayer, or Matthew's Lord's prayer? for they are not the same.