"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen."
I've always wondered about this passage. Here are some thoughts on the ending.
Most modern translations (ESV, NIV) do not include the doxology and it will not be found in USB4 or NA27 either. The reason being it is not present in the Alexandrian texts Vaticanus or Sinaiticus with Sinaiticus often considered the most important witness. It is present in Greek unicals such as D, W, L, K, P. However, all of these witnesses are older than the Alexandrian texts. Also it seems that the earliest commentaries on the Lord's Prayer by Origen and Tertullian were unaware of this ending. It is mentioned by Chrysostom later on.
The doxology is found in the Didache which is earlier than both Vaticanus or Sinaiticus, but it is not a manuscript.
A general rule in textual criticism is that the shorter version is the earlier version. Scribes would be more likely to add to a manuscript than take away from one. In general the later the manuscript the longer it will be.
In regards to the doxology a few thoughts/questions come to mind:
1. If the textual criticism rule of shorter equals earlier applies it would seem the longer ending would be suspect.
2. Kurt Aland asks that if the longer ending is original why would a scribe remove it? This would seem to be strange practice.
3. Is there enough evidence to warrant the doxology?
I've always wondered about this passage. Here are some thoughts on the ending.
Most modern translations (ESV, NIV) do not include the doxology and it will not be found in USB4 or NA27 either. The reason being it is not present in the Alexandrian texts Vaticanus or Sinaiticus with Sinaiticus often considered the most important witness. It is present in Greek unicals such as D, W, L, K, P. However, all of these witnesses are older than the Alexandrian texts. Also it seems that the earliest commentaries on the Lord's Prayer by Origen and Tertullian were unaware of this ending. It is mentioned by Chrysostom later on.
The doxology is found in the Didache which is earlier than both Vaticanus or Sinaiticus, but it is not a manuscript.
A general rule in textual criticism is that the shorter version is the earlier version. Scribes would be more likely to add to a manuscript than take away from one. In general the later the manuscript the longer it will be.
In regards to the doxology a few thoughts/questions come to mind:
1. If the textual criticism rule of shorter equals earlier applies it would seem the longer ending would be suspect.
2. Kurt Aland asks that if the longer ending is original why would a scribe remove it? This would seem to be strange practice.
3. Is there enough evidence to warrant the doxology?
