[annalex]

The question is, could you comment on the content of the prayer. Specifically:

- we ask God that his will be done, as if alternatives to his will could be done instead;
- we link our works of forgiveness to the forgiveness of our sin;
- we ask God to not tempt (or test) us;
- we ask God to liberate us from the Devil.

All these pose no difficulty for me as a Catholic to be understood straighforwardly:

- I normally do what I will, which may or may not conform with God's will;
- my salvation is predicated on my works of charity;
- my faith is tested by events and may be damaged or extinguished;
- despite the acknowledgement of my faith inherent in the prayer, I may lose my salvation to Satan.

Additionally, if you look at the actual Matthew 6:11, it differs from the traditional wording of the prayer as the bread is described as "supersubstantial", -- "epiousion", another (with "kecharitomene") unique word formation that refers to the transsubstantiated bread of the Eucharist rather than the gastronomical bread.

I was wondering how a Calvinist would explain these things.

[HarleyD]

First, you must understand that prayer is meant for our edification-it is not meant as a laundry list of things that we would like God to do. That being said God wants us to pray to Him so that we can see how He is working His will through our prayer. If we pray for a job that we would like to have, regardless of whether we receive it or not, God has answered our prayer for our best interest.

- we ask God that his will be done, as if alternatives to his will could be done instead;

thy will be done

No, there IS no alternative. It is my belief this is a submissive acknowledgment to God sovereign will. We are requesting God's will be done in our lives. It is not a hope that God's will, will be done.

- we link our works of forgiveness to the forgiveness of our sin;

And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

I don't have a problem with this. We are to forgive others just as our father has forgiven us. This is spoken to many times in scripture. Our salvation does not rest on our failure to keep this-only our rewards.

- we ask God to not tempt (or test) us;

And do not lead us into temptation,

God does not tempt us. However it is presumptuous of us when we go off on our own and not follow the leading of the Lord. (Yes, we can run off-think of Jonah.) We should remind ourselves that God is perfectly capable of withholding His grace and mercies from us.

- we ask God to liberate us from the Devil.

but deliver us from evil.

"Evil" here is meant in the general sense of being relieved of trouble, disease, bad neighbors, and, yes, Satan. God wants us to pray for help-that is one of the purpose of prayer. If we are NOT liberated from a disease does that mean that God failed? You and I both know that's not the case. You would say that God answered "No" to your prayer. I would say that God has told me that my affliction is the best thing for me in refining me for His kingdom.

I have no problem interpreting any of this as a Reformer.

Additionally, if you look at the actual Matthew 6:11, it differs from the traditional wording of the prayer as the bread is described as "supersubstantial", -- "epiousion",...

Well, according to my Greek dictionary, it means "the bread that suffices for each day". While the Doury-Rheims translates it "supersubstantial" there is nothing in the Greek that would indicate this is anything other than daily sustenance. I think Jerome got a bit excited.

[Agrarian]

"Additionally, if you look at the actual Matthew 6:11, it differs from the traditional wording of the prayer as the bread is described as "supersubstantial", -- "epiousion", another (with "kecharitomene") unique word formation that refers to the transsubstantiated bread of the Eucharist rather than the gastronomical bread."

Interestingly, St. John Chrysostom -- whose Greek is better than mine -- interprets this unique word (found only in the Gospels) as meaning "that for one day." His subsequent commentary stresses that the body needs "necessary food," and that we are being taught not to "take thought for the morrow." He says that we should not "wear ourselves out with the care of the following day."

St. Theophylact says also that Christ means "what is sufficient for our existence, our essence, and our sustenance. Thus He teaches us not to worry about tomorrow." In his commentary on St. Luke, he says only that Christ is teaching us to ask only for "that bread which is required for our being and for the sustenance of our life, and not to ask for more than we need.

St. Theophylact does add in his commentary on the St. Matthew passage, as a *secondary* meaning, that 'bread for our essence' "is also the Body of Christ, of Which we pray that we may partake without condemnation."

Reflected here are two different speculated etymologies for this unique word of "epiousios." It would seem to me that this is probably an intentionally double meaning, with a primary meaning of "needful" or "daily" applying to our daily physical needs and existence, and a deeper spiritual meaning speaking of the Body of Christ.

Origen apparently felt that the word had been specifically coined by Christ or the Apostles, since it appears nowhere else -- and again, his Greek was better than mine.