The Lord’s Prayer in the Ghanaian Context: A Reception-Historical Study 3110735369, 9783110735369

Table of contents :
Acknowledgements
List of abbreviations
Contents
1 Introduction to the study
2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b–13)
3 The Ghanaian context
4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana
5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana
6 Conclusion: Reading the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b–13) from a Ghanaian perspective
Bibliography
Index of References
Index of Names

Citation preview

Michael F. Wandusim The Lord’s Prayer in the Ghanaian Context

Studies of the Bible and Its Reception

Editorial Board: Constance M. Furey, Brian Matz, Thomas Römer, Jens Schröter, Barry Dov Walfish, and Eric Ziolkowski

Volume 20

Michael F. Wandusim

The Lord’s Prayer in the Ghanaian Context A Reception-Historical Study

ISBN 978-3-11-073536-9 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-073057-9 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-073064-7 ISSN 2195-450X Library of Congress Control Number: 2021941379 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Logo: Martin Zech Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com

To my father, Mumuni Bawumiah Wandusim

Acknowledgements The present work is a revised version of my dissertation, “The Lord’s Prayer and Its Reception in the Ghanaian Context,” which I submitted in April 2020 to the Theological Faculty of the University of Göttingen for the attainment of the academic degree, Doctor Theologiae (Dr. theol.) and subsequently defended on 1st July 2020. It is a reception-historical study of Matt 6:9b – 13 (known as the Lord’s Prayer) in Ghana. Based on the reception-theoretical conviction that studies of receptions of the New Testament (NT) texts in contemporary contexts should first exegetically account for the texts’ historical and biblical contexts, the work starts with a careful traditional critical exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer. It then builds on this by scrutinizing reception materials (both written, taped, and interview-based) from different ecclesial and non-ecclesial sources such as church liturgy, mother-tongue Bible translations, popular songs, school curricula, academic theology, private piety, etc. The ecclesial sources cover the different denominational groupings that populate the Christian landscape in Ghana, i. e. the various traditional mainline churches, African Independent Churches, and Pentecostal-Charismatic churches. It thus covers a wide range of sources, demonstrating the extent of the text’s reception in Ghana. However, the study could not be completed without the enormous support of many people of whom I can only mention a few by name. My first sincere gratitude goes to Bread for the World (Brot für die Welt, Evangelishces Werk für Diakonie und Entwicklung) for sponsoring my theological education in Germany from September 2014 to September 2020. The scholarship that I was offered catered for the financial burden associated with study abroad and thus provided me with the needed peace of mind and space to dedicate myself to this study. I could not imagine this study’s success and the pursuit of my graduate and postgraduate studies in Germany without this gracious funding opportunity from Bread for the World. Part of the support was the enabling doctoral supervision that I received. My doctoral supervisor (Doktorvater), Prof. Dr. Reinhard Feldmeier deserves my heartfelt gratitude in this regard. He had a listening ear, demonstrated the willingness to reason with me, offered me experience-based suggestions, and made critical comments on the work in particular, which helped me navigate the challenging task of producing this study. His sincere interest in my work and my academic career was very inspiring. I am equally thankful to my second and third supervisors, Prof. Dr. Florian Wilk and Prof. Dr. John D. K. Ekem, respectively, for their enriching suggestions and critical comments in the course of the study. Prof. Dr. Ekem, as one working from the Ghanaian scholarly and ecclesial contexts, willingly accepted to co-supervise the study from Ghana. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-001

VIII

Acknowledgements

Both Prof. Dr. Feldmeier and Prof. Dr. Wilk wrote the first and second critical reviews of the work. All three professors with Prof. Dr. Andreas Grünschloß and Prof. Dr. Tobias Georges constituted the thesis examination committee. Also, I received useful feedback from my colleagues in the Göttinger NT Kolloquium (Göttingen New Testament Colloquium) at the Theological Faculty in Göttingen: T. R. Niles, (who proofread portions of the work), Dr. des. Julian Bergau (who also proofread parts of the work), Prof. Dr. Dr. Matthias Becker, Dr. Jens-Arne Edelmann, Dr. Jan Basczok, Konrad Otto, and PD Dr. Heiko Wojtkowiak. Mrs. Petra God patiently guided me through the various administrative stages of the doctoral examination process. Likewise, I am grateful to Prof. Dr. Jens Schrötter and the editorial board of this present series for their critical review of the work. Moreover, Dr. Albrecht Döhnert and his Team at the Theology and Religion Section of De Gruyter Berlin were of immense help to me in the publication process. Admittedly, I take responsibility for any mistakes in the book. At different times of the study, I met with external persons to discuss my work. Prof. Dr. Werner Kahl deserves mention in this regard, for he offered useful suggestions when I was preparing in Winter of 2018 to conduct fieldwork in Ghana for this study. Similarly, my good friend and colleague, Rev. Abraham Boateng at the Goethe University Frankfurt, also made insightful comments on the work. During the fieldwork in Ghana, I received tremendous support from three research assistants: Derrick Ansuade, Rev. Joseph Charles Quartey, and Prince Wandusim. They helped me in searching for and collecting relevant reception documents for the study. My wife, Ekua Annoa Wandusim and my daughter, Victoria Baaba Wandusim, deserve my sincere gratitude for patiently and supportively standing with me through my doctoral studies. Pfr. Dr. Harmjan Dam and Gaby Deibert-Dam and their children served as a family away from home for my family and me. I am deeply grateful to my family (of origin) for their support and encouragement. My father, Mumuni Bawumiah Wandusim, particularly deserves special appreciation for educating all his eleven (11) children even though he never had the benefit of formal education. I recall vividly when, in 1996, he sat me behind his bicycle and rode me to a newly established local government primary school where I started my primary education. I dedicate this book in his honour. Ultimately, my gratitude is to God, who is presented as πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (Matt 6:9b) in the text whose receptions in Ghana is the subject of this present study; αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν (Rom 11:36b). Michael F. Wandusim (Dr.) Göttingen, February 2021

List of abbreviations ACI AICs AIC ATRs BBC CBC CCG CIA EBR EWNT EKK GPCC IH JBR LP MTBH MSS NA28 NT OT PEC PWB PCG PCCs PCC RH RME RT SPG TDNT TWNT WMMS

Action Chapel International African Instituted Churches African Instituted Christianity African Traditional Religions Blackwell Bible Commentaries Catholic Bishops’ Conference Christian Council of Ghana Compassion in Action Encyclopaedia of the Bible and its Reception Exegetisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar Ghana Pentecostal and Charismatic Council Inculturation Hermeneutics Journal of the Bible and its Reception The Lord’s Prayer Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics Manuscripts Nestle Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (28th edition) New Testament Old Testament Presbyterian English Catechism Presbyterian Worship Book Presbyterian Church of Ghana Pentecostal-Charismatic Churches Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity Reception History (of the Bible) Religious and Moral Education Reception Theory Society for the Propagation of the Gospel Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-002

Contents  . . .

Introduction to the study 1 Theoretical background: Reception history 12 Commentary on data Study outline 13

 . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. .. . .. .. .. ..

15 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13) Introduction 15 16 Translation: Matt 6:9b – 13 Textual criticism 16 Textual analysis 19 19 Text delimitation and contextual analysis Syntactical analysis and coherence 28 31 Semantic analysis Pragmatic analysis 32 Synoptic comparison: Matthew, Luke (and Didache) 32 40 Form criticism, tradition and redaction history Religious-historical comparisons 44 50 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός Father (πατήρ) 50 ἐπιούσιος 58 61 Temptation (πειρασμός) Explanation of the petitions 65 65 Invocation: Our Father who is in the heavens First petition: May your name be hallowed 66 Second petition: May your kingdom come 70 Third petition: Your will be done, as in heaven also on 73 earth Fourth petition: Our bread for the coming day give us 75 today Fifth petition: And forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors 80 Sixth petition: And bring us not into temptation, but rescue us 86 from the evil one The doxology: For yours is the kingdom, the power and the glory in the eternities, Amen 92 Conclusion 94

.. .. .. .. .

3

XII

 . . . . .. .. .. .. .  . . .. .. .. .. .. .

.. .. . .  . . .. .. .

Contents

The Ghanaian context 96 Introduction 96 96 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana 106 Political and economic contexts Christianity in Ghana 111 115 Mission founded/mainline churches 122 African instituted churches Pentecostal-Charismatic churches 126 Influence(s) of AIC and Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity on mainline Christianity 136 Conclusion 139 140 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana Introduction 140 140 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa) Inculturation biblical hermeneutics 142 147 Mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics African feminist biblical hermeneutics 152 Liberation biblical hermeneutics 154 155 Post-colonial biblical hermeneutics ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician’: Ghanaian Christology as an example of biblical reception in 156 Ghana Academic perspective(s) on Christology in Ghana 157 Popular perspective: Afua Kuma and Jesus of the deep forest 166 Reception via mother-tongue translation: Capitein’s eightieth 171 century translation of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana Conclusion 176 178 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana Introduction 178 Paradigmatic examples of reception I: Mother-tongue Bible translations 178 The Lord’s Prayer in the Twerԑ Kronkron Asante Twi Bible 179 (2012) The Lord’s Prayer in the Kusaal Bible (2016) 182 Paradigmatic examples of reception II: academic discussion(s) on the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana 186

Contents

. .. .. .. . . . . 

XIII

Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use 196 The Lord’s Prayer in mainline Christianity 197 202 The Lord’s Prayer in African instituted Christianity 204 The Lord’s Prayer in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music 211 Paradigmatic examples of reception V: Ecumenical 220 documents 222 Paradigmatic examples of reception VI: School textbooks Conclusion 226 Conclusion: Reading the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13) from a Ghanaian perspective 227

Bibliography

234 245

Index of References Index of Names

251

1 Introduction to the study “In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father who is in the heavens” (Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς· Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, Matt 6:9); “Whenever you pray, say: Father!” (εἶπεν δὲ αὐτοῖς· ὅταν προσεύχησθε λέγετε· Πάτερ, Luke 11:2)—in this way, both Matthew and Luke insert the logion from Q into their respective Gospels. There is probably no other text in the New Testament (NT) that is so widely appropriated like this text, commonly known as the Lord’s Prayer (LP). Outside the NT, the text is found in the Didache (8:2), an early ecclesiastical document. Already in the manner in which Matthew and Luke deal with the text, we observe their respective earliest distinct reception of the text. Its later reception history has been outlined briefly but insightfully by Ulrich Luz in his commentary on the text¹ and in the entry² of De Gruyter’s Encyclopaedia of the Bible and its Reception (EBR). The reception areas (from Luz’s account) are mostly liturgy, catechism, dogmatics and piety. For instance, the Didache community considered it necessary to pray it three times a day. In addition, Cyprian insisted on it being prayed by sunrise and by sunset just as Augustine believed that a day must not pass in which the LP is not recited.³ Similarly, in the Middle Ages, the LP assumed an important role in monastic hours. But at the same time, because most laypersons lost knowledge of it, it was sometimes, interestingly, used as magic and incantation formulas.⁴ In this period too, specifically in the twelfth century, Hugh of Saint-Victor is said to have presented the petitions of the LP as a means of fighting vices.⁵ This form of reception found (in the twelfth century) diagrammatic representations in which the petitions of the LP were related to (what was then termed) the seven main vices, to the gifts of the Spirit in Isa 11:2– 3 and to seven of the beatitudes in Matt 5:3 – 11.⁶ The diagrammatic depic Ulrich Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 5th ed., vol. 1, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 1 (Düsseldorf: Benziger, 2002), 438 – 40.  ‘Lord’s Prayer’, in Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception Online (Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2018), https://db.degruyter.com/view/EBR/MainLemma_7590.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:439.  Luz, 1:439 – 40.  Laura Cleaver and Andrea Worm, ‘The Septenarium Pictum or Rota Dominice Orationis Diagram: Combatting Vice through Prayer in the High Middle Ages’, in Ordinare Il Mondo: Diagrammi e Simboli Nelle Pergamene Di Vercelli (Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 2018), 266.  For a discussion on the reception of the LP in this medieval diagram, see Ulrich Rehm, ‘Die bildliche Auslegung des Vaterunser im Mittelalter’, in Vater Unser im Himmel: Das Gebet des Herrn, ed. Florian Trenner (München: Klerusblatt, 2004), 92– 103, https://archiv.ub.uni-heidel berg.de/artdok/2864/1/Rehm_die_bildliche_auslegung_des_vaterunser_im_Mittelalter_2004. pdf. See especially the table on page 95 of this article in which he depicts how the petitions were https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-003

2

1 Introduction to the study

tions are found in what is termed in modern literature as Rota Dominice Orationis (RDO).⁷ That aside, in dogmatics of earlier times it was considered a central dogmatic text, being a summary of the Christian Gospel as Tertullian perceived it.⁸ In catechetical practice, not only do current established confessions—be they Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant—have it in their respective catechetical books, but it was also taught already in earlier times to baptismal candidates before their baptism and afterwards prayed as their first spoken prayer.⁹ Furthermore, it was considered as a guide on prayer and a normative Christian prayer after which Christian prayers should be patterned.¹⁰ Its liturgical reception is said to have been first attested to by Cyril of Jerusalem in his twenty-four catecheses which he held in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem in 350 AD. According to this relation, the LP was said at the end of the Eucharistic prayers prior to the communion.¹¹ Based on the foregoing alone, one gets a picture of the impact of the text down the years. The present study will, however, not concentrate on the reception historical study on the text starting from these earlier times to the present nor even look at its reception in the Middle Ages or among the Church Fathers¹²

related to the seven main vices, the Isaianic seven gifts of the Spirit and the first seven of the Matthean beatitudes.  This diagram exists in several manuscripts. A copy of it exists as a single sheet of parchment in the Vercelli Archives (the Archivio Capitolare). Thanks to Prof. Dr. Winfried Rudolf of the English Department at the University of Göttingen who showed me the Vercelli copy in April 2019 when I was with his group of students (accompanying my wife) on a study trip to the Archivio Capitolare Vercelli. For a discussion on this copy and other known copies of the RDO see, Cleaver and Worm, ‘The Septenarium Pictum or Rota Dominice Orationis Diagram: Combatting Vice through Prayer in the High Middle Ages’.  See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:438.  Luz, 1:438. See also, Joachim Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, The Expository Times 71, no. 5 (February 1960): 141, https://doi.org/10.1177/001452466007100504.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:439. This will find resonance in the text’s contemporary Ghanaian reception. See chapter 5 below.  Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 141; Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:439. Jeremias opines that Matthew with his form of the LP gives us the earliest proof of the text’s liturgical use: “St. Matthew gives us the earliest evidence that the Lord’s Prayer was used liturgically in worship and service” (p. 148).  See the work of Maria-Barbara Stritzky, Studien zur Überlieferung und Interpretation des Vaterunsers in der frühchristlichen Literatur, Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie 57 (Münster: Aschendorff, 1989).

1.1 Theoretical background: Reception history

3

or among the Reformers,¹³ but rather on the many ways that it has been received in contemporary Ghana, i. e. in a specific geographical, religio-cultural and socio-politico-economic context. For this reason, the task of this initial chapter is to provide some background information, clarifications and outline to the entire study.

1.1 Theoretical background: Reception history Because the study takes as its theoretical background reception history, it is important to clarify here, albeit shortly, what is meant by reception history (RH). As an approach in/to biblical studies, it has gained currency in the latter half of the twentieth century. This is evident in major projects like the Blackwell Bible Commentaries, the inclusion of Wirkungsgeschicte as a major part of the famous German Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar (EKK), De Gruyter’s EBR and Journal of the Bible and its Reception (JBR), the Oxford Centre of Reception History of the Bible (CRHB), the Oxford Handbook of Reception History of the Bible, Sheffield Phoenix Press’ Biblical Reception (BibRec) including a host of articles, monographs, etc. Conceptually, however, reception history (starting in the 1960s and 70s with classical works¹⁴) traces back to the German words, Rezeptionsgeschichte and Wirkungsgeschichte. ¹⁵ It goes back to Hans Georg Gadamer¹⁶ with his idea of Wirkungsgeschichte. ¹⁷ However, as Timothy Beal has noted, the roots of recep-

 See, Eduard Lohse, Vater Unser: Das Gebet der Christen, 2nd ed. (Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchges., 2012), 105 – 18.  In the field of classics, see the work of Lorna Hardwick, Reception Studies, New Surveys in the Classics 33 (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2003). In literary studies, see Gunter Grimm, ed., Literatur und Leser: Theorien und Modelle zur Rezeption literarischer Werke (Stuttgart: Reclam, 1975)., Jörn Stückrath, Historische Rezeptionsforschung: Ein kritischer Versuch zu ihrer Geschichte und Theorie (Stuttgart: Metzler, 1979).  For a discussion on the two terms see, Ulrich Luz, ‘The Contribution of Reception History to a Theology of the New Testament’, in The Nature of New Testament Theology: Essays in Honour of Robert Morgan, ed. C Rowland, C. M. Tuckett, and R. Morgan (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2008), 124– 26, https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470773789.ch8.  Hans-Georg Gadamer, Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik (Tübingen: Mohr, 1960).  Masiiwa Ragies Gunda, ‘Reception History of the Bible: Prospects of a New Frontier in African Biblical Studies’, in Reception History and Biblical Studies: Theory and Practice, ed. Emma England and William John Lyons (London: Bloomsbury, 2015), 127– 29.

4

1 Introduction to the study

tion history are properly located in the work of Hans Robert Jauss¹⁸ (who was himself influenced by Gadamer) with his idea of “aesthetics of reception.” Jauss opined that the meaning of a text is in the relationship between the text and its readers and not in the text itself.¹⁹ The task of reception history is, therefore, one that shifts the focus from an author to his/her readers. In other words, the relationship between a text and its readers becomes the focus of reception history and not necessarily the text and its author. Thus, reception history²⁰ is used here broadly to mean the study of the uses, “effects” and “impact” of the Bible or biblical texts on the lives of people which is a consequence of how they have read and interpreted the biblical text.²¹ Noteworthy here is that reception of a biblical text is in this case a two-way street: not only is the text impacting its readers, but the readers through their reading and interpretation affect it, too. In other words, not only do 1) the biblical texts inspire and motivate their readers (past and present) to pursue certain courses of action (or even refrain from them), but 2) the readers also in turn discover the need to rephrase, recontextualise, and repurpose the biblical texts for their own lived realities. This implies that readers of biblical texts are not passive in the reading process but co-determinants of the meaning of the texts.²² An immediate example for point 1) is seeing the LP generally as a prayer pattern and accordingly modelling one’s prayer style after it.²³ An instance for point 2), however, is to re-read part of it, e. g. the bread petition (Matt 6:11//Luke 11:3) as, “Give us this day our daily eco-

 Jauss discusses this method in the following sections of his book: Hans Robert Jauß, Literaturgeschichte als Provokation, 2nd ed., Edition Suhrkamp 418 (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1970), 144– 206 (I – XII). In his last lecture (Abschiedsvorlesung) as an active professor, discusses the theory of reception aesthetics in the context of its pre-history: Hans Robert Jauß, Die Theorie der Rezeption – Rückschau auf ihre unerkannte Vorgeschichte, Konstanzer Universitätsreden 166 (Konstanz: Universitätsverlag, 1987).  Timothy Beal, ‘Reception History and beyond: Toward the Cultural History of Scriptures’, Biblical Interpretation 19, no. 4– 5 (2011): 361, https://doi.org/10.1163/156851511X595530.  Used in this work sometimes interchangeably with reception to refer to the approach itself.  Gunda, ‘Reception History of the Bible: Prospects of a New Frontier in African Biblical Studies’, 126 – 30. Cf. Beal, ‘Reception History and Beyond’, 364. Thus in this definition, the impact of a biblical text on its readers in the sense of Wirkungsgeschichte and the reception of the text by the readers in the sense of Rezeptionsgeschichte are combined in one concept, reception history.  Cf. John F. A. Sawyer, ‘The Role of Reception Theory, Reader-Response Criticism and/or Impact History in the Study of the Bible: Definition and Evaluation’ (Paper, Society of Biblical Literature meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 2004), 1, http://bbibcomm.info/?page_id=183. He argues that the readers are in this wise co-creators of the texts they read.  Indeed, here already the impact of the reader is present, for considering the text as prayer structure and modelling one’s prayer style after it is in itself the result of interpretation; the reader’s impact on the text.

1.1 Theoretical background: Reception history

5

nomic resources,” as one of the reception documents²⁴ used in this study shows. Hence, in this study, attention is drawn to cases where this reciprocal impact is conspicuous. Moreover, because the uses, impacts and effects are contingent on how the text has been read, reception history also includes the analysis of (contextual) hermeneutical principles by which readers of a given context interpret a text.²⁵ Understood this way, reception history ought to be distinguished from reception theory (RT). According to Mark Knight, while RH focuses on concrete examples of reception without always getting involved in their implications for understanding interpretation, RT considers the interpretative power of the reader in an abstract and philosophical sense.²⁶ It is in line with this distinction between the concepts that this present study is conceived mainly as an application of the approach and not a theoretical study for the further construction of the theory. The distinction between the two concepts finds a nuance in John F. A. Sawyer’s reflection on reception theory. For him, the relevance of reception theory should be seen in light of four key questions: 1) who are the readers of the text?, 2) what are their presuppositions when they come to the text?, 3) what do they make of the text (i. e. meaning)? and 4) what effect/impact does the text have on the readers?²⁷ In relation to question 4) he explains that, “This is what the term Wirkungsgeschichte is about, the history of the impact of the text on people.”²⁸ It follows from this, then, that reception history issues from reception theory. For as defined above, it includes not only the impacts/effects of the biblical texts on their readers (i. e. Sawyer’s Q4) but also uses of the texts made by the readers based on their readings (i. e. Sawyer’s Q3) and certainly their readings and the resulting uses, impacts and effects of the texts are ultimately influenced by the Erwartungshorizont ²⁹ or presuppositions of the readers (i. e. Sawyer’s Q2). Admittedly, there are certain objections to the underlying presuppositions of this understanding of RH. The assumption is that there exists an ‘original’ text with an ‘original’ context(s) and audience that has been received in later contexts by later audiences (readers) which it is the task of reception history

 See Subsection 5.3 below.  See Beal, ‘Reception History and Beyond’, 359.  Mark Knight, ‘Wirkungsgeschichte, Reception History, Reception Theory’, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 33, no. 2 (1 December 2010): 141, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0142064X10385858.  Sawyer, ‘The Role of Reception Theory, Reader-Response Criticism and/or Impact History in the Study of the Bible: Definition and Evaluation’, 3 – 10.  Sawyer, 9.  That’s, horizon of expectation.

6

1 Introduction to the study

to study. Methodologically, then, while RH does this job of busying itself with later readings in later contexts, the traditional historical-critical method dedicates itself to reconstructing the ‘original’ biblical texts, their authorial intentions (‘original’ meanings), ‘original’ contexts, ‘original’ audience, etc. This seems to be an underlying understanding of RH in, for example, the Blackwell Bible Commentaries (BBC),³⁰ EKK, De Gruyter’s EBR and JBR, individual practitioners like Ulrich Luz, Masiiwa Gunda, etc. For instance, Luz (who wrote his commentary on Matthew for the EKK) explained that, “Reception history of the Bible is the history of the reception of the biblical texts in periods subsequent to New Testament times.”³¹ The same understanding of the task of RH is equally expressed in Sawyer’s second reason behind the Blackwell Bible Commentaries, namely that “(…) the afterlife of the Bible has been infinitely more influential, in every way (…).”³² The “afterlife” here no doubt is another rendition of Luz’s “periods subsequent to the New Testament times.” As stated, this presumption, however, has been vehemently contested by critics. They raise questions as to whether there is really an Urtext or finalised, standardised text (of for e. g. the Lord’s Prayer, Matt 6:9b – 13//Luke 11:2b – 4) whose later effects and uses down the centuries can be studied as this present study seeks to do. They argue that historical-critical exegesis itself is at the end of the day a form of reception and cannot therefore be distinguished clearly from reception history. They reject the notion of “original” text and “original” context and the possibility of recovering or reconstructing them via historical critical exegesis. For this view, everything that has ever existed is reception throughout the ages. Regarding the contention that exegesis itself is part of reception history, Robert Evans has demonstrated that historical-critical exegesis is an essential part of reception history as a synchronic cross-section on the diachronic line of reception history, meaning that exegesis is an integral part of RH:

 Surely, regarding the relationship between exegesis and reception history, Chris Rowland’s (one BBC’s series editors) clarification of the distinctiveness of the series gives a hint: “The main difference about our commentary series is that the historical-critical exegesis is included as part of Wirkungsgeschichte rather than as a primary datum to which matters of Wirkungsgeschichte can be added.” Chris Rowland, ‘A Pragmatic Approach to Wirkungsgeschichte: Reflections on the Blackwell Bible Commentary Series and on the Writing of Its Commentary on the Apocalypse’ (Paper, Society of Biblical Literature meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 2004), 1, http://bbibcomm.info/?page_id=183.  Luz, ‘The Contribution of Reception History to a Theology of the New Testament’, 123.  Sawyer, ‘The Role of Reception Theory, Reader-Response Criticism and/or Impact History in the Study of the Bible: Definition and Evaluation’, 11.

1.1 Theoretical background: Reception history

7

“Historical-critical investigation may thus be viewed within the methodology of reception history as constituting one of the synchronic cross-sections of the diachronic line. Conceived in this way, historical-critical methods not only do not stand outside of the diachronic exercise of reception history, but may be represented as an (essential) operation within it.”³³ Similarly, Mark Knight, in exploring Gadamer’s Wirkungsgeschichte in New Testament scholarship and the collective effect of it (i. e. reception history and reception theory) on historical-critical exegesis, has noted, “Beginning with historical exegesis and then addressing the role of the contemporary reader has its merits, but it fails to question the priority of exegetical interpretation.”³⁴ Concerning the contestation of the notion of original text and original context, however, Brennan Breed’s arguments are forceful and need to be addressed briefly before any statement on why the majority understanding and practice of reception history is followed in this work despite the criticisms. In his Nomadic Text: A theory of biblical reception history, Breed outrightly rejects the notion of “original” biblical texts and their “original” contexts and disputes the possibility of drawing a border between the original text and its later reception. For him, such a divide between a biblical text and its later reception does not exist and is only imaginary. That is because biblical texts, given their different layers of sedimentation, possess the decisive feature of being simultaneously reception and original, constant and change.³⁵ The current critical texts themselves, he argues, are mediated by (Masoretic) scribes and modern scholars.³⁶ Consequently, there is no possibility of determining when a biblical text is fixed (and could be considered original) and when its reception by later audience begins. According to him, “There are no clear borderlines that differentiate even the ‘original context’ of a text from ‘later contexts’ in which one will find ‘receptions’.”³⁷ The implication of Breed’s argument is that not only does he contest the majority understanding of RH, but also the idea that historical exegesis concentrates on an original while RH considers later readings of the original. He declares that, “Reception history is nothing if it is understood as analysing that

 Robert Evans, Reception History, Tradition and Biblical Interpretation: Gadamer and Jauss in Current Practice, The Library of New Testament Studies (London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014), 39, 50.  Knight, ‘Wirkungsgeschichte, Reception History, Reception Theory’, 142.  See Brennan W. Breed, Nomadic Text: A Theory of Biblical Reception History, Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2014), 1– 14.  Breed, 6. It is important to understand Breed’s argument in light of the OT context that he is working from.  Breed, 204.

8

1 Introduction to the study

which comes after the original. There is no such thing, since there was nothing entirely original in the first place.”³⁸ For Breed, then, RH requires a reconceptualization of the nature of biblical texts, not as “migrants” who have come from a well-defined homeland—an original context—and head for other homelands,³⁹ but as nomads who have no reference to origin and destination; by extension, no original text and no original context: “Nomads do not come from any fixed point, and neither are they headed toward any fixed point,” he explains.⁴⁰ David Clark has specifically engaged with Breed’s idea of textual nomadism by using the text of the Lord’s Prayer to test its applicability. His conclusions are that Breed’s idea might (to some extent) be applicable to the LP because 1) the original form of the LP is difficult to reconstruct; the Aramaic form of the prayer as Jesus taught it is impossible to retrace exactly,⁴¹ and 2) the original context of the LP is also elusive to us, for it is impossible to certainly reconstruct the original historical setting within which Jesus taught it.⁴² According to him, “There is no pristine original form, and no objectively determinable historical setting [of the Lord’s Prayer]. (…) there can be no delineated ‘border’ where we can say that the ‘original’ form is fully realized, and receptions begin. With regard to this text [i. e. the Lord’s Prayer], all that we have is reception.”⁴³ Yet he disagrees with Breed’s textual nomadism by examining the early reception history of the LP. In this regard, he reaches the conclusion that textual nomadism cannot fully account for the text’s reception history because its earlier reception history demonstrates consensus that its origin is in the life and proclamation of Jesus. Because of this “canonical remembrance” of its origin, he thinks that the LP cannot be classified as nomadic text in Breedian categories.⁴⁴ Consequently, he proposes the metaphor of “emigrant” as a better term to designate the nature of the text of the LP: referring to a text as emigrant means recognising its origin without specifying its destination; in other words, the LP has an origin but what becomes or has become of in later generations could not be specified from the begin-

 Breed, 204– 5.  Breed, 203.  Breed, 203.  David Clark, ‘Exploring Metaphors for the Reception History of the Lord’s Prayer’, Journal of the Bible and Its Reception 6, no. 1 (24 April 2019): 50, https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr-2019-1001. He argues here that, “With regard to the thematic content of the prayer, (…) it was a markedly unoriginal prayer. There were no dramatic theological innovations therein, and (…) Jewish communities in the first century were praying in very similar ways.”  Clark, 62.  Clark, 62.  Clark, 62.

1.1 Theoretical background: Reception history

9

ning.⁴⁵ Clark’s idea of textual “emigrancy” will be useful for explaining the understanding of the text of the LP and the reception study that is undertaken on it in this present work. In relation to the foregoing the following needs to be indicated. 1. Regarding the rejection of originality of biblical texts and their contexts one should admit, in light of textual transmission with its attendant variants, i. e. the multiplicity of manuscripts of a given biblical text, that indeed the quest of discovering a truly original text is impossible and what we therefore have can only still remain as “reconstructed texts.” In the same vein, efforts to achieve a hundred percent reconstruction of the first century contexts in order to better understand texts of the NT is extremely difficult as every archaeological find presents a possibility of updating or readjusting the present reconstructed context. That notwithstanding, the extreme difficulty (or rather impossibility) of reconstructing the original NT texts and contexts does not simultaneously imply that they did not originate from somewhere, that they were not written within given contexts to particular audience; certainly, they did not appear in a vacuum. In other words, our inability to retrieve entirely the original version of, say, Paul’s letters to the Corinthians does not rule out the historical fact that these letters were written by Paul and to a congregation in Roman Corinth in the first century. Therefore, classifying them as nomadic will not account fully for their existence. Moreover, one should even venture to say that textual nomadism itself implies that there is a beginning point, for nomads do not set off from nowhere. Even if they do not have their starting point in a homeland to which they might want to return one day, the fact is that at the first instance, they began their nomadic journey from somewhere which qualifies in principle as their origin even if it is no longer traceable. This is discernible in the following explanation from Breed: “In order to study the nomad, one must follow the tracks through the steppe and watch for patterns of movement and action that always change over time and space.”⁴⁶ “The tracks” being plural here implies there was a first single track, an initial step which had begun the whole process. Accordingly, the quest to reconstruct that first track as far as possible could still be part of textual nomadism. On the one hand, one needs to admit that Breed’s proposal has merits for the task of reception and applies in several ways to biblical texts as Clark’s reflection on it shows. On the other hand, however, one needs to state that, like any other meta-

 Clark, 64.  Breed, p.203

10

2.

3.

1 Introduction to the study

phor, textual nomadism has its limits too. Therefore, as indicated, Clark’s idea of textual emigrancy is of more applicability in this study. The present study, despite the stated criticism, still combines exegesis with reception history because, given that there is demonstrable consciousness of the origin of the text at hand as Clark explains, there remains then value in first interrogating this source(s) and attempting to see how the text might have appeared in its source context(s). Truly, one might have a reconstructed text of Matt 6:9 – 13//Luke 11:2b – 4 in NA28 (as used in the exegetical part of this work) and its corresponding English (and other Ghanaian mothertongue) translations (which the study context uses), nevertheless the need for historical exegesis of it (to explain how the “reconstructed” text itself resulted) is doubtless. At the same time, I affirm that ultimately the exegesis that I will produce on the text could equally qualify as my reception of the text, yet that does not rule out the necessity of doing it in the first place. For it is my view that by first reconstructing the historical horizon or horizon of the past of the text (the job of exegesis) and seeing it against that horizon, the reception historian gains a needed starting point to assess its current impacts and uses. Moreover, the question as to whether one sees exegesis as an integral part of RH or whether the two should be held separately, with exegesis beginning with one task and RH following second with its own, different task, or whether one adopts the majority conception of RH as dealing with later readings subsequent to the biblical times, is to my mind, a question best answered by the kind of reception one does. If one is looking at the NT texts in their first century contexts and how their authors produced them⁴⁷ and their possible impacts on their initial audience, it is in that case necessary to see that exegesis is rightly a part of reception as much as reception is a part of exegesis (without one coming after the other). But if one is doing, for example, a contemporary (middle twentieth century to twenty-first century) reception history of a text like the LP, it makes sense to recognise that the text did not fall from heaven and therefore its origin(s) and possible earliest meaning(s) within its present canonical contexts have to be accounted for and that reception in this case will then be concerned with its ‘afterlife’ in a contemporary context—the Ghanaian one, for example. Hence, there is a need for both approaches, one preceding the other. Certainly,

 That’s, how they made use of other sources like the OT, traditions/hymns, contemporary philosophical ideas and concepts, etc.

1.1 Theoretical background: Reception history

11

I do not prioritise exegesis over RH but see it as a necessary starting point chiefly defined by the nature of the reception study done here. Undoubtedly, every biblical reception takes place in a context, for which reason studies in biblical reception history observe that historical, social and cultural backgrounds provide the space for the reception of a text.⁴⁸ These backgrounds are termed as “contextual factors” in this present study. Because contextual factors change with time, the context that they shape also changes and this in turn affects how a text is read and interpreted. Put differently, the evolving life and changing contexts of readers affect their reception of a biblical text.⁴⁹ For instance, the interpretations given to biblical texts in Africa in the era of colonial rule are different from the interpretations given to the same texts in contemporary Africa. In Apartheid South Africa, for example, the Bible received different interpretations than it does now. As Justin Ukpong in sketching the developments of biblical interpretation in Africa has observed, while the biblical interpretation in the 1930s – 70s was more reactive and apologetic, that of the 1990s was more proactive.⁵⁰ The change should be understood within the context of the independence struggle of most African states (the political factor) during times before the 1990s which had socio-economic ramifications for them as well. Moreover, church (and other religious) organisations were also affected by the independence struggle of the time; particularly mission churches in Africa also sought independence from their ‘mother’ churches in Europe and North America in this same era. Therefore, it is not surprising that contextual theologies such as liberation theology, Black theology (mostly in Apartheid South Africa), etc., emerged in Africa (and indeed in Latin America). This explains the need to include in a study like this a section that deals with the nature of the reception context itself. This has meant practically, for this present study, roping in a bit of Ghanaian church history, philosophic and politico-economic data as well as sociological data. Having made these theoretical clarifications, attention will be given now to yet an important part of this introduction, namely the data that constitutes the content of the reception study of the text in Ghana.

 See Gunda, ‘Reception History of the Bible: Prospects of a New Frontier in African Biblical Studies’, 130.  Cf. Gunda, 131– 32.  Justin S. Ukpong, ‘Developments in Biblical Interpretation in Africa: Historical and Hermeneutical Directions’, in The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories and Trends, ed. Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube (Leiden. Boston. Köln: Brill, 2000), 12 ff.

12

1 Introduction to the study

1.2 Commentary on data The above conception of reception informs the data that has been used here. The data is broadly divided into two kinds. On the one hand is academic data by which is meant data from researched and published material within academic circles in Ghana which deals with the subject of the Lord’s Prayer. Sources of this data include academic journal articles, master theses,⁵¹ doctoral dissertations and published books. On the other hand, is popular data. By popular data is meant non-academic literature that are written (directly or indirectly) on the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana. Sources of this data include books written especially by Pentecostal-Charismatic leaders and other church and para-church leaders. Moreover, into these two broad dichotomies, the data is further discriminated into oral and written data. Instances where written material was not found or rather not readily available, qualitative research methods such as semi-structured interviews were used to collect information for the study. This then constitutes the oral data. In this regard, about five personal interviews with Pentecostal-Charismatic leaders as well as pastors of AICs were conducted. The interviews were transcribed and the resulting data was analysed using content analysis. ⁵² Written data, as the name goes, constitutes non-oral data which includes both academic and popular literature. A part of the data that does not fall into the academic-popular dichotomy is ecclesiastical material such as catechetical and liturgical material. For instance, the catechetical and liturgical books of the Presbyterian Church of Ghana (PCG), the oldest established and continuing mainline church in Ghana, are used to illustrate the liturgical and catechetical receptions of the LP in mainline Christianity. Moreover, there is the school material part of the data that does not also fall into the academic-popular dichotomy. The school material (mainly used in basic education in Ghana) shows the reception of the LP outside the Christian context in Ghana. Even though the reception context of the study is limited largely to the Christian space in Ghana since political independence in 1957, a material outside

 Specifically Master of Divinity (M. Div) theses from the Trinity Theological Seminary Legon, Accra, and Master of Philosophy (M. Phil) theses from the Department for the Study of Religions at the University of Ghana, Legon, Accra.  Content analysis as a research tool for analysing documentary evidence is essentially used to analyse the frequency and use of words, terms, concepts or themes in a given document in order to evaluate their meaning and significance in that document. See Judith Bell, Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time Researchers in Education, Health and Social Science, 5th ed. (Berkshire: Open University Press, 2010), 132– 39.

1.3 Study outline

13

this context is presented, as an exception, to indicate an interesting case of reception of the text in a secular sphere. A last outlier in the academic-popular dichotomy is lyrical data in the form of songs. The data gathering process fetched a song made from the text of the LP that shows an interesting case of reception worthy of academic attention. Acknowledging the broadness of the “Ghanaian context” on the one hand, and the research constraints such as time, financial and human resources (to cover the entire Christian context) on the other hand, the research adopted an opportunity sampling approach. Opportunity sampling, as a social scientific qualitative research tool, is proposed by Judith Bell. According to Bell, in a short term research project in which random sampling proves difficult to apply, “(…) you may be forced to interview anyone from the total population who is available and willing at the time.”⁵³ Adapting this to the present study, the research aimed for paradigmatic data where and when it was readily available. Paradigmatic data here means that the chosen reception documents depict patterns of typical receptions of the text in the research context. Accordingly, much of the data was limited to Accra (the capital of Ghana) and its neighbouring cities like Akropong.⁵⁴ The cities of Kumasi and Tamale were also places for data collection. Tamale is the biggest city in the north of Ghana and Kumasi is the second biggest city in the entire country. The main implication of using an opportunity sampling approach in gathering the data is that the research results here do not claim complete representativeness of the reception status of the text in the entire research context but rather provide cases of its variegated but paradigmatic effects and uses.

1.3 Study outline The study is divided into parts with sections and subsections. There are in all four parts excluding this main introduction and the main conclusion. Part I (i. e. chapter 2) exegetes the text of the Lord’s Prayer (with Matt 6:9b – 13 as the base text) with the help of historical-critical exegetical methods. Following from the theoretical discussion above, this part exegetically accounts for the text in its historical, biblical context. It also provides the needed starting point to engage the reception materials used in this study. The exegesis is done having

 Bell, 150.  The research library of the Akrofi-Christaller Institute of Theology, Mission and Culture in Akropong was used.

14

1 Introduction to the study

in mind the broader context of the kingdom proclamation mission of Jesus of Nazareth as attested in the Gospels. This background allows for a possible combination of both eschatological and non-eschatological perspectives that have prevailed in the exegetical history of the text. The exegetical discussions on the text are also rooted in the broader OT (including later Judaism) traditions and the larger NT background. If Part I deals with the exegesis of the text this way, then Part II (i. e. chapter 3) has the main task of defining what is meant by “the Ghanaian context” as found in the title of the study by describing the contextual factors involved and clarifying that the actual reception context in view is the Christian contexts in Ghana. Similarly, Part III (i. e. chapter 4), based on the conviction that reception studies also involve a consideration of various hermeneutical principles or approaches that could influence a given reception context,⁵⁵ discusses various hermeneutical approaches prevalent in biblical studies in contemporary Africa. The approaches that receive attention there are, inculturation biblical hermeneutics, mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics, African feminist biblical hermeneutics, liberation biblical hermeneutics and post-colonial biblical hermeneutics. Besides discussing these forms of hermeneutics, this part also presents examples of reception of NT texts/themes in Ghana; specifically discussed are Christology in Ghana and an earlier translation of the LP by Jacobus Elisa Johannes Capitein (1717– 1747) into Mfantse, a local Ghanaian language. Together with the preceding Part II, Part III sets the needed contextual background for the discussions in the final part, Part IV (i. e. chapter 5). In this part, based on the data used for the study, six paradigmatic reception areas (i. e. contexts in which the text finds use) of the LP are considered. The six areas emerging from the data include; mother-tongue translations of the text in the Asante Twi Bible and the Kusaal Bible, academic discussions on the text mainly in journal articles, doctoral dissertations, M.Phil. and M.Div. theses, liturgical uses in the three main streams of Christianity in Ghana (mainline Christianity, African Independent/Instituted/Initiated Christianity and Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity), in devotion and music, in ecumenical documents and finally in school textbooks for basic education in Ghana. In this way, the study succeeds in putting together as many but paradigmatic ways that the text finds reception in Ghana.

 Beal, ‘Reception History and Beyond’, 359.

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13) 2.1 Introduction Gerhard Lohfink starts his reflection on the Lord’s Prayer by noting that anyone who prays the Lord’s Prayer enters a room in which countless persons have already entered.⁵⁶ Similarly, an exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer falls into the same categorisation. That notwithstanding, given the conceptual framework within which this work is done, this part dedicates itself to exegetically accounting for the text of the LP in its historical biblical context. The conceptual framework as outlined above underscored that, with the LP, there is need to exegetically account for its ‘original’ context before attempting a study on its contemporary receptions in Ghana. This, therefore, explains the theoretical connection between the exegetical part here and the reception part below. The text will be exegeted using Udo Schnelle’s suggested exegetical steps at the end of his Einführung in die Neutestamentliche Exegese ⁵⁷ which starts from translation through textual criticism, textual analysis, synoptic comparison, etc. to explanation of each petition in the text. Surely, not all Schnelle’s proposed exegetical steps can be completely applied in the manner and order that he has outlined and discussed in his book. Therefore, the steps are adapted to suit the kind of text being treated in this study.⁵⁸ Furthermore, the chosen study text (which is translated⁵⁹ below) is taken from Matt 6:9b – 13 in the critical edition of Nestle Aland Novum Testamentum Graece (NA28). The Matthean text is chosen (over the Lucan text) only because it offers the form of the LP as found in the reception context of the study. Undoubtedly, in the exegesis below, due consideration is given to the Lucan text and its context in Luke’s Gospel, except that much attention is paid to the Matthean context in the exegetical process.

 Gerhard Lohfink, Das Vaterunser neu Ausgelegt, 3rd ed. (Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk GmbH, 2015), 9.  Udo Schnelle, Einführung in die neutestamentliche Exegese, 8th ed., UTB 1253 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 226.  Indeed, Schnelle himself does not expect his presented exegetical steps to be so followed but rather to be adapted to suit the kind of text being exegeted. See, Schnelle, 226.  Wherever a translation is done by me, it is so noted, otherwise long quotations are taken from the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-004

16

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

2.2 Translation: Matt 6:9b – 13 The translation deliberately chooses (where possible) other vocabulary aside the usual ones known in existing translations of the text as a way of providing a fresh reading of the text. It also tries, where possible, to maintain the Greek syntax of the text for the same effect. Table 1: Translation of the Greek text Greek Text (NA)

English translation

b πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου·  ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου· γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς·  τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·  καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν·  καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. [[῞Οτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία και ἡ δύναμις και ἡ δόξα είς τοὺς αἰῶνας ἀμήν.⁶⁰]]

Our Father who is in the heavens; may your name be hallowed;⁶¹ may your kingdom come; may your will be done, as in heaven, also on earth; our bread for the coming day give us today; and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors; and bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. [[For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory in the eternities, amen.]]

2.3 Textual criticism The text for the above translation (except the doxology) is based on the results of the following textual criticism. Starting with the invocation in Matt 6:9b, while the above chosen text reads ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (“in the heavens”), the Didache and mae (Middle Egyptian versions) offer the variant reading, ἐν οὐρανῷ (“in heaven”). This variation is, however, negligible⁶² to the import of the textual criticism, for the plural could be an influence from or translation of the Hebrew (dual) ‫ַה ָשַּׁ֖מיִם‬, and just like Matthew’s preference for “kingdom of heaven” and

 The doxology is not part of the main text of NA28 but in the critical apparatus.  Or be held in reverence, be revered.  See, Kurt Niederwimmer, The Didache: A Commentary, ed. Harold W. Attridge, trans. Linda M. Maloney, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998), 136.

2.3 Textual criticism

17

not “(…) of God,” “Father in the heavens” could be a Matthean (Jewish-influenced) way of avoiding to mention the divine name.⁶³ Moreover, in the second part of the third petition, ὡς is omitted in the Majuscule (Uncial) D*05, the Old Latin translations such as a, b, c, k; manuscripts of the Coptic dialect Bohairic (bo) and in the citations of Tertullian and Cyprian. Within the same line of the text, τῆς is inserted before γῆς in the Majuscules D 05, K 017, L 019, Θ 038, in the Minuscules f13, 565. 579. 700. 892. 1241. 1424; in the lectionaries l 844. l 2211, and in the Majority text. However, the Majuscules ‫ ּא‬01, B 03, W 032, Δ 037 and the Miniscule family f1 omit it just as they have ὡς omitted by the above-mentioned witnesses. Furthermore, while Uncials ‫ ּא‬01, B 03, and Δ 037 all represent the Alexandrian text type and, for the text of Matthew, the Uncial W 032 falls under the Byzantine group of text, the f1 comes under the Caesarean text type.⁶⁴ Therefore, what one has here is a combination of witnesses from three text types with the Alexandrian text type (chiefly represented by ‫ּא‬01, B03) carrying the greatest worth for the text critical decision at this point. Even though the other witnesses supporting the omission of ὡς and the inclusion of τῆς as indicated above may be quantitatively more and have a wider geographical spread, the quality of the Alexandrian text type (supported by the other text types named above and the minuscule family f1) suggests that the reading followed here is most likely the original as Matthew had it. Another part of the text deserving text critical consideration is Matt 6:12. In the first part of this petition, i. e. the protasis, while the Didache reads τὴν ὀφειλήν (“debt” in singular) and Origen in his citation offers τὰ παραπτωμάτα (“sins” or “wrongdoings”), the reading followed here is τὰ ὀφειλήματα (“debts”). This is preferred because of its witnesses which will be stated in relation to the second variation in the apodosis of this same petition. The variants to the apodosis are: 1. Matt 6:12b ἀφίομεν: D 05, L 019, W 032, Δ 037, Θ 038, 565, co?. 2. Matt 6:12b ἀφίεμεν ‫ּא‬2, K 017, f13, 579. 700. 1241. 1424. l 844. l 2211, the “Majority text,” co?; Didache. 3. Matt 6:12b ἀφήκαμεν ‫ *ּא‬01, B 03, Z 035, f1, vgst and syp.h.

 See Lukas Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Grundlinien und wichtigste Ergebnisse der internationalen Forschung, Basiswissen Theologie und Religionswissenschaft (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 272– 73; M. Eugene Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament: History, Literature, Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2012), 548; Simon Kistemaker, ‘Lord’s Prayer in the First Century’, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 21, no. 4 (December 1978): 324.  Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (Oxford: Clarendon Pr., 1964), 218. D has a mixed classification, partly Alexandrian, partly Western, partly Byzantine and partly Caesarean.

18

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Variants 1 and 2 could be rightly considered as “only dialectal variants.”⁶⁵ Nevertheless, the question of whether the present plural in Variants 1 and 2 or the aorist plural in Variant 3 is original remains. Yet, considering the quality of the witnesses supporting ἀφήκαμεν in Variant 3, especially by ‫ *ּא‬01, B 03, Z 035 which all belong to the Alexandrian text, it could qualify as the nearest to the original reading as Matthew had it. Moreover, J. Jeremias⁶⁶ posits that ἀφήκαμεν presents a more difficult reading (i. e. lectio difficilior ⁶⁷) than the present form because it seems to suggest that human’s forgiveness becomes the example for God to follow. And given that a lectio difficilior is more likely to be rephrased for easy reading than the other way around makes Variant 3 the most likely original reading among the three variants. Lastly, even though the doxology is not to be found in the earliest MSS⁶⁸ of the Gospel of Matthew (including the Uncials ‫ ּא‬01, B 03, D 05, Z 035, 0170, the Minuscule family f1, the lectionary l 2211, the Vulgate and part of the Old Latin tradition [lat], the Middle Egyptian tradition [mae], part of the Bohairic tradition [bopt] and a citation from Origen), for the purposes of this study, it is added in accordance with the form of the LP in contemporary church usage. Consequently, the inserted reading provided by the Majuscules K 017, L 019, W 032, Δ 037, Θ038; the Minuscules f13. 33. 288c. 565. 579. 700. 892. 1241. 1424, the lectionary l 844, the Majority text, the Latin MSS f, q, g1, k; the Syriac and the Coptic traditions syh, syc.p, and bopt, sa respectively, is added to the text under discussion.⁶⁹ The foregoing text critical considerations, aside helping to reconstruct the text that is to be shortly textually analysed below, reveal the textual life of the text in different geographical locations and time periods.⁷⁰

 Niederwimmer, The Didache, 136. Lohmeyer considers that while ἀφὶεμεν is “classical and ‘more’ cultured,” ἀφιομεν is “a popular neologism.” The Lord’s Prayer, trans. John Bowden (London: Collins, 1965), 161.  Joachim Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 4th ed., Calwer Hefte zur Förderung biblischen Glaubens und christlichen Lebens 50 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verl., 1967), 14. He intimates that this aorist form suggests an Aramaic “perfectum praesens,” for which reason he argues that the translation should be “as we herewith forgive our debtors.” Cf. Niederwimmer (1998), 136.  Schnelle, Einführung in die neutestamentliche Exegese, 56.  Manuscripts.  The addition of the doxology under the textual criticism does not imply that by the results of the textual criticism in this study, the doxology is part of the reconstructed near original text, but to indicate that for the overall purpose of this study, namely the reception of the LP in the Ghanaian context, it is added here. The aim of the textual criticism—to reconstruct the original text— is therefore limited to the text without the doxology.  This is also a form of reception that could be considered in another reception study context.

2.4 Textual analysis

19

2.4 Textual analysis The above reconstructed text will be unpacked using the following textual analytical methods; text delimitation, contextual analysis, syntactic considerations, semantic analysis and pragmatic considerations as well as determination of coherence of the text.

2.4.1 Text delimitation and contextual analysis The delimitation of the text takes into consideration the context within which Matthew⁷¹ chooses to place his text of the LP. The text, Matt 6:9 – 13, stands in the middle of 6:1– 18, i. e. teaching on the three deeds of righteousness before God (almsgiving, 6:2– 4; prayer, 6:5 – 8; and fasting, 6:16 – 18). The instruction on forgiveness in 6:14– 15 is a Matthean elucidation and emphasis on the fourth petition in 6:12. Contextually, Matthew introduces the text within the macro-context of the Sermon on the Mount⁷² (Matt 5 – 7).⁷³ Considered as “the most carefully structured speech in the Gospel,”⁷⁴ Matt 5 – 7 is a programmatic section of the first canonical Gospel as it presents the first major, extensive speech of Jesus encompassing major themes of the Gospel.⁷⁵ Noteworthy is that within Matt 4:23 – 9:35 Jesus is presented first as having authority in word (teaching, 5 – 7) and then in

 For the purposes of the present study, an introductory discussion of Matthew’s Gospel in terms of authorship, date, location, audience, theology, etc. will not be presented here unless where such information is necessary for a particular section being discussed. For such introductory information on the Gospel, see among others, Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 534– 55; Reinhard Feldmeier, ‘Die synoptischen Evangelien’, in Grundinformation Neues Testament: Eine bibelkundlich-theologische Einführung, 4th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 75 – 142.  The title, Sermon on the Mount, goes back to Augustine in the fourth century who refers to the section as De Sermone Domini in monte. Klaus Wengst has contested the appropriatedness of this title for Matt 5 – 7 and proposes instead, “the Teaching on the Mount” (Berglehre). Klaus Wengst, Das Regierungsprogramm des Himmelreichs: Eine Auslegung der Bergpredigt in ihrem jüdischen Kontext (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2010), 13.  See Wengst, Das Regierungsprogramm des Himmelreichs; Reinhard Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, in Salz der Erde: Zugänge rur Bergpredigt, ed. Reinhard Feldmeier, Biblisch-Theologische Schwerpunkte 14 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), 15 – 108.  Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 550.  Aside Matt 5 – 7, we have 10 (sending out the disciples); 13 (the collection of parables); 18 (life in the ecclesia) and 23 – 25 (the judgement discourse).

20

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

deed (miracles, 8:12– 9:35). This is framed up with the summary statements in 4:23 and 9:35. Thus, for Matthew, Jesus is first a Messiah in word and then a Messiah in deed with his teaching authenticating his miracles and not the vice versa.⁷⁶ In keeping with this understanding of Jesus’ ministry, Matthew introduces Jesus’ public ministry first with his words: 5 – 7. He takes the contents of 5 – 7 largely from Q, supplemented with his own Sondergut (special material, M) and a few references from Mark.⁷⁷ Its carefully structuredness is seen in how he not only built an inclusio around it with 5:1– 2 and 7:28 – 8:1a, but also in how he sets the stage for the speech with 4:23 – 5:2. Ulrich Luz points to this structuredness when he observes that “It [the Sermon on the Mount] is built symmetrically around a core, namely, the Lord’s Prayer in 6:9 – 13. The sections before and after the Lord’s Prayer parallel one another (…).”⁷⁸ In 4:23 – 5:2 we are informed that Jesus’ itinerant ministry in Galilee included teaching in the Synagogues (διδάσκων ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς), preaching the Gospel of the kingdom (κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας) and healing every disease and sickness among the people (θεραπεύων πᾶσαν νόσον καὶ πᾶσαν μαλακίαν ἐν τῷ λαῷ, v. 23). News about this ministry spreads out and attracts to him crowds even beyond Galilee (vv. 24– 25). It is upon seeing the crowds that he sets himself on the mountain, calls his disciples to himself and begins to teach them while the crowds stand in the background (5:1– 2). With 4:23 – 5:2 as a stage-setting, the content of the teaching follows with the structure below. i. ii. iii. iv.

5:1– 2 5:3 – 12 5:13 – 16: 5:17– 48: a. 5:17– 20: b. 5:21– 32 c. 5:33 – 48:

Ascent of the mount and call of the disciples The beatitudes The disciples as salt and light Jesus and the Law The fulfilment of the law by Jesus and the “greater righteousness” First three antitheses on anger (vv. 21– 26), lust (vv. 27– 30) and divorce (31– 32) Second three antheses on oaths taking (vv. 33 – 37), retaliation (vv. 38 – 42) and love of enemies (43 – 48)

 Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 549 – 50. See also Udo Schnelle, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 3rd ed., UTB: Theologie, Religion 2917 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 421.  Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 550.  Ulrich Luz, Matthew 1 – 7: A Commentary, ed. Helmut Koester, trans. James E. Crouch, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007), 172.

2.4 Textual analysis

21

v. 6:1– 18 a. 6:1 b. 6:2– 4 c. 6:5 – 15 i. 5 – 8

Three deeds of righteousness before God Carefulness in carrying out righteousness First deed of righteousness: Almsgiving Second deed of righteousness: Prayer Contrast with the hypocrites (vv. 5 – 6) and the Gentiles (vv. 7– 8) ii. 9 – 13 The Lord’s Prayer iii. 14– 15 Emphasis on forgiveness in v. 12 d. 6:16 – 18 Third deed of righteousness: Fasting vi. 6:19 – 7:12 Additional instructions a. 6:19 – 24 Inability to serve two masters equally b. 6:25 – 34 Anxiety about life c. 7:1– 5 Judging d. 7:6 Desecration of holy things e. 7:7– 11 Asking, seeking and knocking f. 7:12 Summary of the teaching: the Golden rule vii. 7:13 – 27 The two ways (vv. 13 – 14), false prophets (vv. 15 – 20) and two builders (vv. 21– 27) viii. 7:28 – 29 Conclusion of the teaching: response of the crowds From the structure, the Sermon on the Mount can be summarised as follows. Following from 4:23 – 25, 5:1– 2 is a narrative prologue to the teaching in which Jesus climbs the mountain, calls to himself the disciples out of the crowds and opens his mouth to speak. The crowds remain in the background as co-audience to the teaching that is to unfold. With the stage set this way, the teaching begins with the makarisms by which the life situation of those upon whom the kingdom of heaven is in-breaking is characterised (5:3 – 12); then in 5:13 – 16 the disciples are declared metaphorically as the salt of the earth and the light of the world. Jesus then shifts attention to his relationship to the Law and Prophets, one that is fulfilment and not abolition. Through this he puts forth the major theme of his teaching: the pursuit of greater righteousness needed for entry into the heavenly kingdom (5:17– 20). Chapter 5:21– 48 then unpacks what this greater righteousness is through Jesus’ interpretation of the Law in a thesis and antithesis format. The next section, 6:1– 7:12, brings to view the concrete acts and life situations that embody this greater righteousness, one of which is succinct prayer done in the private chamber (6:5 – 8) with a summary of the whole teaching being the so-called “Golden Rule” in 7:12. The closing section then underlines the significance of concretising in one’s life Jesus’ teaching which encapsulates God’s will, because that is what will grant entry into the heavenly kingdom and not the mere verbal confession (7:13 – 27). The whole

22

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

teaching is then brought to an end with a narrative epilogue that takes attention back to the crowds who were left silent in the background in 5:1 by relating their response to Jesus’ teaching: an amazement about the authority with which Jesus taught (7:28 – 29).⁷⁹ Moreover, Luz observes regarding the structure that the kingdom of heaven overarches the whole teaching while Jesus’ interpretation of the Law and the Prophets is leitmotif of its main part and the Lord’s Prayer is its central text. Therefore, the structure leads one from the “radical demands of God” to the inner realms of faith, the place of prayer, where “the father’s nearness” is experienced and then out to the “praxis of renouncing possessions and of love.”⁸⁰ Matthew achieves this fine structure by employing structuring elements such as repetitions and formulaic expressions which are part of his style. For instance, not only is the beatitudes section clearly marked out by the repetition of μακάριοι, the antitheses are also easily recognised through the formula (with is varying forms), “but I say to you” (ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν). He repeats this six times and only here in the antitheses.⁸¹ Additionally, there is no difficulty in recognising the three deeds of righteousness before God that the author presents in 6:1– 18 because he signals them with ὅταν in vv. 2, 5 and 16. Another structuring element is found in 7:28 – 29 which soundly concludes the sermon with the crowds’ amazement about Jesus’ authoritative teaching. The Evangelist uses here a formula that he uses elsewhere (in an identical manner) to conclude the other major speeches in his Jesus story (i. e. in 11:1; 13:53; 19:1 and 26:1): “And it came to past when Jesus had finished (…).” M. E. Boring points to the function of this formula when he indicated that, “The formula is not merely concluding, but transitional, pointing back to the completed speech and forward to the continuing narrative, relating Jesus’ words to his deeds, and binding speech and narrative together.”⁸² His style of repetition is further worth noting because of its relevance to our study text. He repeats the following (theological) statements, “your father who is in the heavens” (5:16, 45, 48; 6:1, 6, 14, 26; cf. 7:11, 21, etc.), “the kingdom of heaven” (5:3, 10, 19 – 20; 7:21); “righteousness” (5:6, 10, 20; 6:1, 33), etc. This in addition to the repetition of words like “evil,” “heaven,” prepares the readers/hearers in such a way that when they get to the LP, the vocabulary there are not entirely new, because they have met some of them already.

 Cf. Wengst, Das Regierungsprogramm Des Himmelreichs, 23 – 24.  Luz, Matthew 1 – 7: A Commentary, 172. Cf. Matthias Konradt, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015), 65.  Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 269.  Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 546.

2.4 Textual analysis

23

This entire literary context (5 – 7), then, underlines Jesus’ authority in word as he is presented as a teacher with authority (7:29).⁸³ As a teacher with authority, he seems to stand in the tradition of the halachic discourse⁸⁴ presenting his interpretation of the Law chiefly found in the antitheses (5:21– 48).⁸⁵ Matthew achieves this with his but-I-say-to-you formula by which he underscores Jesus’ exclusive interpretative authority.⁸⁶ To underscore that with this formula the Matthean Jesus presents his own interpretation of the Law in contradistinction to that in his time, Lukas Bormann translates ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν as “Ich (im Gegensatz zu anderen) aber sage euch” (“But I, in contrast to others, say to you”).⁸⁷ The teaching presented here with its radical interpretation of the demands of the law and relativization of its ritual aspects reveals central aspects of Matthean theology⁸⁸ which, for our purposes here, should only be stated. He presents God, not only as the great king (5:35), but chiefly as the heavenly Father who allows his sun to rise on both the evil and good and sends his rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous (5:45). Furthermore, God, the Father not only takes care of his creation by feeding and clothing it (6:25 – 34), but he equally sees the righteous acts (including prayer) done in secret and rewards them (6:1– 18). His designation of God as Father is central to his theology for which reason the concept will be analysed in detail later (see 2.8). The stated theology here has the ethical implication that those upon whom the kingdom of heaven has come has to pursue a “greater righteousness” by which they will actually be doing the will of God which will give them entry into the heavenly kingdom (5:20; 7:21). It is worth noting here that for Matthew the will of God, conceived as righteousness (δικαιοσύνη), is found in the Law as authoritatively interpreted by

 This an important part of Matthean Christology. See Schnelle, Theologie Des Neuen Testaments, 424– 27.  See Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 268 – 70; Michael Bachmann, ‘“Antithese Gegenüber der Bibel”?: Zur halakhischen Argumentation innerhalb der Bergpredigt’, in Er Stieg auf den Berg … und Lehrte sie (Mt 5,1 f.): Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zur Bergpredigt, ed. Hans-Ulrich Weidemann, Stuttgarter Bibelstudien 226 (Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk GmbH, 2012), 71– 96. On the rhetoric of the Sermon on the Mount see also Nils Neumann, ‘Die Anschaulichkeit der Rede Jesus: Ein Beitrag zur Rhetorik der Bergpredigt’, in The Gospel of Matthew at the Crossroads of Early Christianity, ed. Donald Senior, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CCXLIII (Leuven-Paris-Walpole, MA: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2011), 622– 236.  Luz, Matthew 1 – 7: A Commentary, 172.  Luz, 231.  Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 269.  On Matthew’s theology see Bormann, 259 – 91; Schnelle, Theologie Des Neuen Testaments, 416 – 49.

24

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Jesus.⁸⁹ Concretely, the greater righteousness consists not only in loving one’s enemies (love of enemy), being perfect like the heavenly Father, but also in redefined concrete acts of almsgiving, prayer and fasting. Against this literary background, the LP stands not only structurally as the centre of the whole Sermon on the Mount as Luz as noted,⁹⁰ but theologically as part of the concrete acts of the better righteousness being required by Jesus of his audience. With this, attention should be given now to the micro-context (i. e. 6:1– 18) of the LP. As already indicated, the pericope, which in most part belongs to Matthew’s Sondergut (M), deals with three acts of righteousness which are almsgiving (vv. 2– 4), prayer (vv. 5 – 13) and fasting (vv. 16 – 18) which are “three traditional Jewish religious practices (…).”⁹¹ Each of them is introduced with ὅταν. The treatment of these righteous acts is still in congruous with the theme of “greater righteousness” through the repetition of δικαιοσύνη in 6:1 which is found in 5:20. Accordingly, Luz has argued that after developing what the will of God (the greater righteousness) is in 5:21– 48, Matthew presents the contents of this righteousness from chapter 6 onwards.⁹² In this sense, he sees 6:1– 18 as the climax of the Sermon on the Mount with 6:9 – 13, the LP, as its centre.⁹³ That noted, one observes that 6:1– 18 also follows the style of the antitheses in 5:21– 48, even though here, instead of the but-I-say-to-you formula, it is “truly I say to you” (6:2, 5, 16) that is to be seen. That notwithstanding, the two formulae function in similar ways in their respective sections: with the former, Jesus presents his interpretation of the Tora and with the latter, he declares the non-rewarding nature of the current manner of practising the three religious acts. Accordingly, he first presents the current practice of the religious act, gives a prohibition regarding it with a negative imperative and ends with a command through a positive imperative with which he presents the redefined way of carrying out the act. The negative imperative, disallows the present usual way of doing the righteous act in question while the corresponding positive imperative introduces the redefined way of doing the deed. The introduced new way of performing the righteous act is

 See Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 542– 43; Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 281– 86.  See, Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:457; cf. David Wenham, ‘The Sevenfold Form of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew’s Gospel’, Expository Times 8 (1 May 2010): 378.  Wenham, ‘The Sevenfold Form of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew’s Gospel’, 379.  Luz, Matthew 1 – 7: A Commentary, 304.  Luz, 304. Cf. Wolfgang Wiefel, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 1 (Berlin: Evang. Verl.-Anst., 1998), 130. who thinks that LP is not the redactional centre of the Sermon on the Mount.

2.4 Textual analysis

25

still to be seen against the major theme of greater righteousness in 5:20. Its pragmatic force is of course found in Jesus as the Teacher with authority (7:29). The negative-positive imperative structure can be illustrated by looking at each righteous act in turn. The prohibition regarding almsgiving, for instance, is that the deed is not to be done like the hypocrites who do it to be praised by others (6:2). The use of μὴ…ὥσπερ (6:2) indicates this. The command, in contrast, requires that the almsgiving be done in secret (so that the left hand does not even get to know what the right hand has done) to be rewarded by the Father who sees in the secret (6:3 – 4). The use of the contrastive conjunction δέ signals the positive imperative (6:3). Because vv. 5 – 8, which is on prayer, is connected to the study text, it should be attended to last. Therefore, the third act, fasting in vv. 16 – 18 should be considered. The prohibition here is signalled by the μὴ… ὡς construction in v. 16 while the positive imperative is indicated with the contrastive, δέ in v. 17. The prohibition regarding fasting is that one should not appear sad for people to recognise the act, because that is exactly what the hypocrites do. But the redefined way—the positive imperative—is to anoint one’s head and wash one’s face during fasting (v. 17). Interestingly, the teaching on prayer (vv. 5 – 8) presents two prohibitions and two positive imperatives and therefore is more extensive than the other two deeds of righteousness. The first prohibition signalled by οὐκ…ὡς (v. 5) is that the act of prayer should not be done like the hypocrites who love to pray standing in the synagogues and at the street corners where they might be seen by people (v. 5). However, it should be—the positive imperative—done by going into one’s private room (τὸ ταμεῖον, also, “storeroom”) and closing the door behind (v. 6). Here, the private and individual nature of the prayer required is not only clearly indicated by τὸ ταμεῖον, but also by the second person singular, “you” (συ), repeated six times in this single verse. Therefore, Florian Wilk and Jörg Frey have, in their respective reflections on the text, underscored the private character of prayer ( and the Lord’s Prayer) in this context, even if with different emphasis.⁹⁴ For instance, Wilk, on the basis of Matt 6:6, holds firmly to the view

 Florian Wilk, ‘“So sollt ihr beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’, in Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 266 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 87; Jörg Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, in Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, ed. Florian Wilk, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 266 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 7. See also Daniel A. Smith, ‘“Pray to Your Father [Who Is] in Secret” (Matthew 6,6): Considerations about Divine Presence and Sacred Space’, in The Gospel of Matthew at the Crossroads of Early

26

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

that prayer in this context has a private character and the LP for that reason was meant for use by the individual in his/her private prayer praxis and thus displays less the character of a collective (gemeinschaftlich) usage: “Der private Charakter des Gebets und damit auch der Verwendung des Vaterunsers wird durch Mt 6,6 unmissverständlich angezeigt.”⁹⁵ Frey, on his part, makes his observation against the later liturgical status of the text by indicating that, “Das Vaterunser ist in seinem ursprünglichen Setting im Jüngerkreis Jesu noch kein liturgisches, offizielles Gebet, sondern ein Privatgebet einer Gruppe (…). Es anvanciert zum liturgischen Gebet erst später (…). Der private Charakter des Gebets ist ernst zu nehmen (…).”⁹⁶ In other words, the LP in its original setting among the disciples was not a liturgical prayer but a private prayer of a group. The second prohibition pertains to the content of prayer and it being answered (heard). It should not be full of babbling words as the Gentiles do. It is indicated by the construction μὴ…ὥσπερ in v. 7. Unlike the previous ones, the positive imperative here is not clearly stated but implied: “do not be like them [i. e. is the Gentiles], for your [plural] Father knows that you have need of these things before you ask him” (6:8, μὴ οὖν ὁμοιωθῆτε αὐτοῖς· οἶδεν γὰρ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὧν χρείαν ἔχετε πρὸ τοῦ ὑμᾶς αἰτῆσαι αὐτόν). The implied required prayer act here is thus one that should be precise and succinct which will be heard by the Father. It is against this background that vv. 9 – 13, the study text, is introduced. Relevant observations from the foregoing data are that the three acts are arranged such that prayer is the middle of the three and thus underlines its importance in this context. In other words, the prayer praxis of the disciples (and not to forget the crowd at the background, 5:1) is connected to their almsgiving and their fasting.⁹⁷ Additionally, God is presented consistently in relation to all three righteousness acts as “your Father” who sees in secret and rewards these acts. Moreover, the private character of prayer is highlighted. Furthermore, the motive

Christianity, ed. Donald Senior, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CCXLIII (Leuven-Paris-Walpole, MA: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2011), 653 – 63.  Wilk, ‘“So sollt ihr beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’, 87– 88. In addition, see pp. 100 – 102.  Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 7. See also Ursula Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser: Reflexionen zur Muttersprache Jesu anhand der Texte von Qumran und der frühen Targumim’, in Jesus, Paul, and the Qumran Texts, ed. Jörg Frey, Enno Edzard Popkes, and Sophie Tätweiler, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2 390 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015), 134,. for whom the later addition of the doxology to the text indicates that initially it was not a liturgical text but a private prayer.  Wilk, ‘“So sollt ihr beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’, 88.

2.4 Textual analysis

27

for doing the stated acts of righteousness is brought to the fore. Thus for Matthew, it is not about the acts in and of themselves, but supremely the motivation behind doing them (6:1– 2, 5, 16). This the distinguishing factor between the hypocrites and Jesus’ audience. In relation to the righteous deed of prayer, however, as could be seen in the second positive imperative, the Father not only rewards the prayer made in the inner room (i. e. in secret/private), but also he has foreknowledge of the needs of the disciples before they pray. This provides assurance of answered prayer and is thus of great relevance to our understanding of the LP in which the disciples are to invoke God as “our Father.” Designating God as Father theologically underlines God’s caring attention and goodness by which he rewards both the charity done in secret, the prayer done in the private chamber and the fasting done unpublicised.⁹⁸ It has been shortly noted that the LP (6:9 – 13) is introduced on the background that prayer should be precise and succinct (6:7– 8) and also private (6:5 – 6). This should be dilated further, for it raises the question of the function of 6:9 – 13 in the context of 6:1– 18. The text (vv. 9 – 13) is introduced as part of the positive imperative regarding the righteous deed of prayer in 6:5 – 8. Being a part of the positive imperative, therefore, makes it fit into the entire structure of 6:1– 18. Otherwise, the whole periscope could run uninterrupted without it (vv. 9 – 13).⁹⁹ Before answering the question of the function of the LP in this literary context, it is equally significant to pay close attention to how Matthew introduces it. Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς, “In this manner, therefore, pray,” is how he redactionally introduces it. Attention here should be given to οὕτως, one of Matthew’s preferred words.¹⁰⁰ It appears thirty-two (32) times in Matthew (compared to ten times in Mark and twenty-one times in Luke), the highest in a single book in the entire NT.¹⁰¹ As an adverb (of manner), it can be translated among others as “thus,” “in this way,” “in this manner,” “in the same way,” “so,” etc.¹⁰² In most of its 32 appearances in Matthew, it looks back at what

 Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 275 – 76.  Indeed, Matt 6:7– 15 seems to be an interpolation into the literary context of 6:1– 18, for 6:1– 6 and 6:16 – 18 could flow without this section.  See Luz, Matthew 1 – 7: A Commentary, 34.  Paul Hoffmann, Thomas Hieke, and Ulrich Bauer, Synoptic Concordance: A Greek Concordance to the First Three Gospels in Synoptic Arrangement, Statistically Evaluated, Including Occurrences in Acts, vol. 3 (K-O) (Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000), 965; Robert Morgenthaler, Statistik des neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes, 3rd ed. (Zürich: Gotthelf, 1982), 127.  Cf. Hoffmann, Hieke, and Bauer, Synoptic Concordance: A Greek Concordance to the First Three Gospels in Synoptic Arrangement, Statistically Evaluated, Including Occurrences in Acts, 3 (K-O):965.

28

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

has been said previously as a basis of what is to be said now. For example in 5:16 οὕτως is used to look back at v. 15 (that a lamp is placed on a lamp stand so that it lightens the entire house) as a basis for saying that the disciples’ light should shine in the same way (οὕτως) before people so that their good works will be seen to the glory of their heavenly Father. Further examples can be seen in 5:19; 6:30; 7:12, 17, etc. Even though in 6:9a οὕτως points to what is to be said (forward looking),¹⁰³ the syntactical combination of οὕτως with οὖν makes it look back first at what has been said in vv. 5 – 8 as a basis for what is to be said in 9b – 13. In other words, introducing the LP with οὕτως (combined with οὖν) is similar to saying, “based on what has been said above, i. e. in 5 – 8, this is the manner in which you should pray.” Admittedly, the precise and succinct nature of the petitions allows the inference that the backward look of οὕτως is first to 7– 8 then to 5 – 6. All this leads to the conclusion that the function of the LP in the context of Matt 6:1– 18 is that it is an example of a right, succinct prayer to the Father who sees in secret with which the individual can distinguish his/her private prayer praxis from the hypocrites and the Gentiles. ¹⁰⁴ With this in mind, the text itself should now be given a syntactical attention.

2.4.2 Syntactical analysis and coherence The vocabulary of the text indicates predominance of substantives which, among others, point on the one hand to the addressee of the prayer (i. e. πάτερ ἡμῶν) and on the other hand to the various needs or concerns—e. g. ὄνομα, βασιλεία, θέλημα, ἂρτος, οφείλημα, πειρασμός, ὀφειλής, πονηρός—that are picked up as petitions in the prayer. The one extraordinary word that is used only once here in the entire NT literature and which has proven exegetically difficult over the years is the hapax legomenon ἐπιούσιος. This adjective, as the only one in the entire text, plays a decisive role in how the fourth petition (i. e. the bread petition) is understood. Also, syntactically interesting is the structure of the bread petition: here unlike in the first three and last two petitions, the verb is not at the beginning of the petition, instead an accusative object, “bread” qualified further by ἐπιούσιος is.  See Walter Bauer, Griechisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frühchristlichen Literatur, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, 6th ed. (Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1988), 1208 – 9.  Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 58; Wilk, ‘“So sollt ihr beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’, 87.

2.4 Textual analysis

29

This word-order could hardly be accidental, for it emphasizes “our bread” and points to the existential importance of this bread to the disciples. Furthermore, the repetition of the second person singular genitive pronoun, σου in the first three petitions does not only trigger a rhythmic sound, but also emphasizes the three substantives (nouns)—ὄνομα, βασιλεία and θέλημα—to which it (σου) indicates possession. It equally indicates that the petitions here, content wise, are those that relate in the first place to God and not to the ‘flesh and blood’ praying disciples.¹⁰⁵ Additionally, it holds the first three petitions together as one unit. The same function is carried by the repetition of the first person plural pronoun ἡμεῖς which appears not only in the nominative case, but also in the accusative (ἡμᾶς), dative (ἡμῖν) and genitive (ἡμῶν) cases. Noteworthy is that in all these instances, this personal pronoun appears in plural as against σου which, in all the instances, is in singular.¹⁰⁶ Moreover, the usage of this personal pronoun (ἡμεῖς) reveals an observable division and change of perspective in the text, where the emphasis, which was on “our Father” until this point, shifts to the praying disciples.¹⁰⁷ Besides that, verbs make up only about eleven percent (11 %) of the vocabulary of the entire (Greek) text. Among these, the three verbs (i. e. ἀγιάζω, ἔρχομαι, γίνομαι) that appear in the first three petitions are all in the third person singular aorist imperative passive. Similarly, the verbs that appear in the rest of the petitions are also all aorist imperatives (but largely active imperatives)—δὸς, ἄφες, ἀφήκαμεν, ῥῦσαι, except εἰσενέγκῃς in the sixth petition which is an aorist subjunctive. It is linguistically interesting the change of the voice from passive in the first part of the text to active in the second part. This voice-switch varies the coloration and tone of the prayer. Additionally, it could also mean that, on the one hand, in the first three petitions both God and humans could be subjects of the

 Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:435; Konradt, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 104; cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 39.  This, together with the text’s rhythmic nature, could explain why it easily found liturgical usage in the early church. Cf. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:439.  See Karl Georg Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1 (Tübingen: Mohr, 1950), 44. who observing the hypothetical Aramaic text, notes that “It has its particular importance when from the first half to the second the rhyme changes from -ak ‘your’ to -na ‘our’” (my transl. of the German original). A recent poetic analysis of the text can be found in Michael Wade Martin, ‘The Poetry of the Lord’s Prayer: A Study in Poetic Device’, Journal of Biblical Literature 134, no. 2 (2015): 347– 72, https://doi.org/ 10.15699/jbl.1342.2015.2804. For him, the LP displays poetic devices that are usual of poetry in the Hebrew Bible (i. e. the OT) and in the Septuagint. As a result, he argues that this allows the text to fit into “the tradition of ancient Jewish liturgical poetry” (pp. 348, 371).

30

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

predicates. Certainly, God is assumed as the immediate subject, but through the passive formulation of these petitions, a space seems to be created for human agency on the part of the praying disciples.¹⁰⁸ This point will become clearer when these petitions are discussed into detail later below. On the other hand, the voice-switch means that in the second set of petitions (where the voice is active), God is exclusively the subject of the predicates. The predominance of the aorist tense in the LP is equally linguistically remarkable. One view opines that it “is usually the case elsewhere in prayers.”¹⁰⁹ In addition, I think that the use of this tense here reveals urgency in the petitions, because the aorist tense indicates not only a one time past action, but it also has a punctual character carried in the sense of “now!” and this is usually expressed in the imperative mode as found in this text. Furthermore, the use of the conjunctions και and ἀλλὰ as well as the particle ὡς is indicative. The combination of both ὡς and και in the second part of the third petition reveals the desire to see the will of God which apparently has already prevailed in heaven, to equally prevail on earth. ὡς, also, at its first instance in the text, could point to a redaction station of the text which will be subsequently discussed. Moreover, the coordinating conjunction και in the second set of petitions builds a smooth transition from one petition to the other and therefore binds the three petitions of bread, forgiveness and temptation into a unit. Lastly, the conjunction ἀλλὰ is telling in three senses. First, it does reveal the desire, not only to be preserved from temptation, but more importantly (it appears) also, to be rescued from the evil one. Second, it connects the two parts of the last petition in a parallelismus membrorum. Third, just like ὡς, ἀλλὰ also seems to indicate a redaction stage of the text which will equally be given due consideration later. In terms of coherence, the syntactical features of the text above create and sustain a clear coherent structure in the text. This makes it a fit for precisely what Matthew seeks to say with his use of the LP: the prayer of the disciples should not only be done in secret (in the inner room, 6:5 – 6) i. e. private, but it should also be succinct. In other words, it should not be full of many incoherent words like the heathens, in which case one will actually be babbling like a stammerer¹¹⁰ and not praying and thereby forgetting the kind of God one serves:

 Cf. Marc Philonenko, Das Vaterunser: Vom Gebet Jesu zum Gebet der Jünger, UTB 2312 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002), 45.  See: Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 191.  For morphologically, βατταλογέω (in Matt 6:7) stems from two words: βάττος and λέγω, and βάττος means stammerer. See Barclay Newman’s Concise Greek-English Dictionary in NA28, 2012, p. 33.

2.4 Textual analysis

31

the Father who possesses foreknowledge of the needs of his children (Matt 6:7– 8).

2.4.3 Semantic analysis To bring to fore the semantic content of the text, the two parts of the text need to be considered.¹¹¹ The first is the initial three set of petitions, the “You-Petitions” (Du-Bitten) and the second is the subsequent three set of petitions, the “We-Petitions” (Wir-Bitten).¹¹² While the You-Petitions centre on God (as our Father) as indicated, particularly on his attention to the entire creation [for it borders on his name, kingdom and will], the We-Petitions focus on his caring and merciful attention to the praying disciples,¹¹³ because they border on their human situation on earth, i. e. on questions of material provision, need for forgiveness, protection from sin’s seductiveness and deliverance from the evil one.¹¹⁴ In this manner, the two sets of petitions are not in opposing relationship to each other but are two parts of a single unit. Held together this way, what can be seen here is a prayer in which the disciples are taught to first pray for the ‘things’ that relate to God and his relationship to the wider creation, before they request of the Father for their immediate needs.¹¹⁵ Therein lies, by extension, the point of right praying as the context suggests.

 Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 20 – 23. observes these two parts and argues that the You-Petitions are prayers of Jesus himself while the We-Petitions are the ones he taught his disciples. Therefore, for him, the LP is the combination of these two separate prayers. One has, however, to ask the extent to which this explanation of the two parts is historically tenable. There is little evidence to fully substantiate that historically.  Six petitions are counted here because the last petition is understood as a parallelismus membrorum and therefore rather a two-fold petition. Michael Wade Martin, through his poetic analysis of the text, argues that the poetic features in the second part of the text support a single petition but not two: Martin, ‘The Poetry of the Lord’s Prayer’, 370.  Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 60.  Cf. Konradt, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 104.  Seen in this way, the echoes of Matt 6:33—that by initially seeking God’s kingdom and its righteousness, one’s basic needs will be realised—are hard to ignore.

32

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

2.4.4 Pragmatic analysis It is hard to escape hearing the polemic tone with which the text of the LP is introduced in Matthew. Consequently, unlike in Luke, Matthew seeks, with his text of the LP, to instruct his audience on right praying¹¹⁶ by giving them an example; they should be brief and precise with their prayers in contradistinction to the “hypocrites” and “heathens,” particularly because God (the Father) knows what they need before they pray (Matt 6:8).¹¹⁷ This right form of prayer is part of the greater righteousness that gives them entry into the heavenly kingdom (5:20). He achieves this in the following ways. First, before the audience of his Gospel get to 6:9 – 13, they would have read 5:20 with its call to pursue the greater righteousness. Second, in the context of 6:1– 18, they would have seen the non-rewarding nature of the existing way of practicing the three righteous acts which is underlined by the truly-I-say-to-you formula. Specifically on prayer, they would have learned, through the double polemic, that the prayer style of the hypocrites (6:5, to win human admiration) and the Gentiles (6:7, wordiness) have no reward before the Father who sees in secret. Third, with such a background, and introducing his text with Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς (“in this manner, therefore, pray”), Matthew prepares his audience to receive the LP as an example of the right, succinct prayer with which they can shape their private prayer praxis in contradistinction to the hypocrites and Gentiles. Ultimately, the text pragmatic receives its primary force through the image of Jesus as the Teacher with authority (7:29) who teaches this text.

2.5 Synoptic comparison: Matthew, Luke (and Didache) It has already been indicated that the text has a double tradition, appearing in Matthew and Luke. Therefore, this subsection will investigate the two traditions source-critically. However, since the text appears in the Didache too, its context there will similarly be considered. Below is a presentation of the text in the respective sources.

 Just like right form of almsgiving and fasting in Matt 6:2– 4; 16 – 18.  This presupposes that the Gentiles who babble, do so because their gods do not really possess foreknowledge of their needs. Granted the correctness of this presupposition, then a close reference will be the story of Elijah and the prophets of Baal and Asherah on Mount Carmel (see 1 Kings 18:19 – 42).

2.5 Synoptic comparison: Matthew, Luke (and Didache)

33

Table 2: The Lord’s Prayer in Matthew, Luke and the Diadache Matthew : – 

Luke : – 

 οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς·  εἶπεν δὲ αὐτοῖς· ὅταν πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· προσεύχησθε λέγετε· πάτερ, ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου· ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου· γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς·  τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον·

ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου· ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου·

 τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν·  καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα  καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰς ἡμῶν, ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς καὶ γὰρ αὐτοὶ ἀφίομεν ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν· παντὶ ὀφείλοντι ἡμῖν·  καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς πειρασμόν, εἰς πειρασμόν. ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. [῞Οτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεἰα και ἡ δύναμις και ἡ δόξα είς τοὺς αἰῶνας ἀμήν]

Didache :¹¹⁸ μηδέ προσεύχεσθε ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταί, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ἐκέλευσεν ὁ κύριος εν τῷ ευαγγελιῷ αὐτου, ουτως προσεύχεσθε· πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ· ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου· ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου· γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς· τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον· καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὴν ὀφειλὴν ἡμῶν, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφίεμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν· καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δύναμις και ἡ δόξα είς τοὺς αἰῶνας.

From the above table, initial attention is drawn to the similarity between the texts of Matthew and the Didache. They, however, portray the following few variations in wording without which one could conclude that Didache 8:2 is a complete replication of Matt 6:9b – 13. As already noted at under the textual criticism, while in Didache 8:2 one finds ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ (“in heaven,” singular), in Matt 6:9b the same is formulated in plural i. e. ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (“in the heavens”). Besides that, on the one hand, Didache reads τήν ὀφειλήν (“debt”) in the fifth petition but Matt 6:12a reads τὰ ὀφειλήματα (“debts”) in the same petition. Still on the fifth petition, while the Didache uses the first person plural present ἀφίεμεν, Matthew uses the first person plural aorist ἀφήκαμεν. Beyond that, the last variation between the two texts is found in the doxology. Here, while the  The Didache text is taken from, James McConkey Robinson, Paul Hoffmann, and John S. Kloppenborg, eds., The Critical Edition of Q: Synopsis Including the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mark and Thomas with English, German, and French Translations of Q and Thomas, Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), 206 – 8.

34

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Didache offers a two-part doxology, namely ἡ δύναμις και ἡ δόξα (“the power and the glory”), the best available manuscripts of Matthew does not have a doxology. However, after a text critical consideration of the Greek text of the Didache, Jürgen Wehnert has expressed doubts about the originality of the singular “heaven” and the singular “debt.” For him, that could be later additions to the original text.¹¹⁹ Granted his conclusions, the difference between the two texts will be reduced to the present ἀφίεμεν and the added doxology. That notwithstanding, the current divergences are more linguistic than content. The doxology in the Didache, however, points to its liturgical use, whereas the Matthean text does not yet give such a direct clue. Moreover, Wehnert has noted that the LP in the Didache, among others, has a religious identity function for the Didache community: it serves to mark out the Didache community in their prayer praxis from the Gentiles and especially the Jews.¹²⁰ This contrast to the function of the text in Matthew as will be shown later below. In terms of similarity, both texts exhibit the same number of petitions and they are both found in comparable contexts in their respective books: a polemic and catechetical context. For both Matthew and Didache refer to the hypocrites in relation to whom the respective believers must differentiate themselves in their prayers.¹²¹ Having made these initial comments on the text in Matthew and Didache, attention will be shifted to a source-critical consideration of the text in Matthew and Luke. From Table 2 above, the following observations can be made: 1. The text of Matthew is doubtlessly longer than that of Luke. This is because the Matthean text has more petitions than the Lucan one: while the former has 6 petitions, the latter has only 5 petitions. The additional petitions will be pointed out in points 3 and 8 below. 2. Matthew has an extended invocation—πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς (“our Father who is in the heavens”) while Luke has a short one—πάτερ (“Father!”). 3. In the You-Petitions, while the first two petitions are the same in both Gospels, Matthew, however, has a third, additional petition—γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς—not found in Luke.

 Jürgen Wehnert, ‘Ein Gebet für alle christliche Gemeinden: Zum Vaterunser in der Didache’, in Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 266 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 152.  Wehnert, 161.  Indeed, Matt 6:7 makes mention of the heathens (οἱ ἐθνικοί) as well who use many words and babble in prayer.

2.5 Synoptic comparison: Matthew, Luke (and Didache)

35

4.

Even though We-Petitions begin in the same way in both cases (i. e. with the bread petition), there are obvious differences in wording. For instance, while Matt 6:11 reads τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον, Luke 11:3 reads τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν. There is not only the addition of τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν in Luke 11:3, but also the use of the present imperative δίδου, where Matthew uses the aorist imperative δός. 5. In the forgiveness petition (Matt 6:12//Luke 11:4a – b), while Matthew has τὰ ὀφειλήματα (“debts”), Luke uses the usual Greek word τὰς ἁμαρτίας (“sins”). 6. Likewise, in the second part of the same petition, while Matthew employs the aorist form of the verb (ἀφήκαμεν), Luke uses the present form (ἀφίομεν). 7. The difference in the formulation of this part of the petition in both Gospels is obvious: Matthew reads ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν (“as we have forgiven our debtors”) while Luke reads καὶ γὰρ αὐτοὶ ἀφίομεν παντὶ ὀφείλοντι ἡμῖν (“for we ourselves also forgive everyone who owes us something”). 8. Even though both Evangelists have the first part of the sixth petition, it is only Matthew who has the second part, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ (“but deliver us from the evil one”).¹²² 9. Finally, the literary context of the entire text is different in both Gospels in terms of form and not theme.¹²³ Unlike Luke who gives his text a narrative introduction,¹²⁴ Matthew places his text at the heart of Matt 5 – 7 (the Sermon on the Mount) as discussed above. Certainly, regarding the Sermon on the Mount, Luke has a comparable context in Luke 6:20 – 49 (the Sermon on the Plain), but he chooses not to insert his text there but rather at the beginning of a major chapter of his Gospel, Luke 11. Here, he intentionally introduces his text in the following manner; first, he depicts Jesus as having gone to pray somewhere and second, after prayer a disciple comes to request that he teaches them to pray making reference to the example of John the Baptist (11:1). The LP is therefore introduced as an answer to the disciple’s request. This setting then gives Luke’s text an intention different from that of Matthew. For Luke, the teaching on prayer is based on the concrete example

 Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 10; Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 9 – 15.  Indeed, both Evangelists have their texts located in context of teaching on prayer.  Cf. Peter T. Tomson, ‘The Lord’s Prayer (Didache 8) at the Faultline of Judaism and Christianity’, in The Didache: A Missing Piece of the Puzzle in Early Christianity, ed. Jonathan A. Draper and Clayton N. Jefford, Early Christianity and Its Literature 14 (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2015), 171– 72.

36

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

of the Master’s prayer praxis, it finds its authority there. Also, for him, the prayer marks out the group. Thus it is has an identity making function and a collective prayer status. Wilk notes this when he observes that, “Dabei [i. e. in relation to Luke 11] wird im Kontext des lukanischen Doppelwerks deutlich, dass Lukas das Vaterunser als Gemeinschaftsgebet versteht. “¹²⁵ But in Matthew, the force of the text is located not only in the general structure of the Sermon on the Mount (5 – 7), but more importantly in the image of Jesus as the Teacher who teaches with authority in contradistinction to the scribes (Matt 7:28 – 29). Moreover, for Matthew, the LP does not yet have a group-identity-making function, as already indicated above. The different locations of the text in these two Gospels therefore reveal the different redactional intentions of each Evangelist in respect of the text. The foregoing, therefore, raises two synoptic (problematic) questions: 1) why are there two versions of the LP and 2) which of the versions is ‘the original’: the one in Matthew or Luke? Both will be considered one after the other, beginning with the synoptic question. Several hypotheses exist in scholarship on the text attempting to explain the existence of the two versions. For instance, Jeremias¹²⁶ opined earlier on that Matthew and Luke are presenting the respective versions of the text as they found it in the liturgies of their respective communities; Matthew presenting a Jewish-Christian liturgical text and Luke a Gentile-Christian liturgical text. He argues: “Wir haben den Gebetswortlaut zweier Kirchen vor uns. Jeder der Evangelisten überliefert uns den Wortlaut des Vater-Unsers so, wie es zu seiner Zeit in seiner Kirche gebetet wurde.”¹²⁷ In other words, Jeremias solves the synoptic problem by placing it squarely on the different liturgical provenances of the text.¹²⁸ With this hypothesis, the text has the same Sitz im Leben ¹²⁹ in the two

 Wilk, ‘“So sollt ihr beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’, 87. “Indeed, it becomes clear in the context of the Lucan Dopplewerk that Luke understands the Lord’s Prayer as a collective prayer.” Transl. mine.  Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 9 – 15.  Jeremias, 11. (“We have before us the wording of the prayer of two churches. Each of the Evangelists transmits to us the wording of the Lord’s Prayer just as it was prayed in his time in his church.”). Transl. mine.  See Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1 – 13, ed. David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, and Bruce Manning Metzger, Word Bible Commentary 33A (Waco, Tex.: Word Books, Publ., 1993), 145. who holds a similar view of two different provenances of the text.  François Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, ed. Norbert Brox et al., vol. 2, Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 3 (Zürich: Düsseldorf: Benziger:

2.5 Synoptic comparison: Matthew, Luke (and Didache)

37

sources, namely, liturgy but from two different communities. This hypothesis has implications for the question of Matthean redaction of the text which will be treated below. The theory of two liturgical provenances of the text is not the only possible explanation to the existence of two versions of the text. Two more could be added. First, since the exegesis here presumes a two-source theory¹³⁰ (a Marcan priority and the existence of Q¹³¹), the two versions could be explained by assuming that both Matthew and Luke took the text from Q and that Luke seems to have preserved the original version of the Q text (in length) while Matthew redacted his text.¹³² The other possibility is that prayers that were transmitted in the name of a teacher assumed the possibility that the said teacher could have taught it in different versions on different occasions, so that, with the LP, Jesus could have taught it in different versions.¹³³ All three hypotheses—a two-liturgical-provenance, Q-explanation and different teachings of the same prayer— offer possibilities to address the synoptic problem. But the question of originality still stands especially if one goes with the different liturgical wording and Q-explanation. The third, however, makes such a question very difficult to answer if not impossible. In respect of the question on originality, the majority scholarly consensus¹³⁴ has been to assume that Luke (11:2b – 4) presents the ‘original’ version of the text

Neukirchener, 1996), 123. thinks of not one Sitz im Leben of the text but Sitze im Leben: not only in liturgy, but also in catechism, personal devotion, etc.  For more on this, see Schnelle, Einführung in die neutestamentliche Exegese, 68 – 98.  On Q see, John S. Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q: Trajectories in Ancient Wisdom Collections, Studies in Antiquity and Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987); Christopher M. Tuckett, From the Sayings to the Gospels, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 328 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014); Christopher M. Tuckett, Q and the History of Early Christianity: Studies on Q (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996).  Or better still, granted that both Evangelists used different versions of Q as Schnelle, Einführung in die neutestamentliche Exegese, 90. has postulated that there could have existed two versions of Q, then in the Q that Matthew used, the text was already enriched with further petitions.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:436; see also Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung.  Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 15; Lohse, Vater Unser, 12– 13; Craig A. Evans, Matthew, New Cambridge Bible Commentary (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012); Luz, Das Evangelium Nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:436; see Konradt, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 104; Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 59.

38

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

in length (the length-argument) while Matthew offers the original wording¹³⁵ (the wording-argument). This is explicated as follows. The length-originality is explained (following the Q-explanation) by assuming that Luke could have preserved his Q-text, while Matthew probably redacted his. In support of this assumption are the following observations on the text. Starting with the invocation, Luke’s is obviously shorter¹³⁶ and could likely have been extended by ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς as found in Matthew and not the other way round.¹³⁷ In addition, at a stylistic level, “in the heavens” or “heavenly” is typically Matthean.¹³⁸ Moreover, the third petition (concerning the divine will) could have been an insertion of Matthew to the first two petitions of Luke. The same argument is true for the second part of the sixth petition (concerning deliverance from the evil one, Matt 6:13b). A possible Matthean redaction of especially the two additional petitions will be looked at closely below. Nonetheless, suffice it to state here that a possible Matthean redaction does not exclude the possibility that he reproduced the form of the text as he found it in the liturgy of his community. This is explained by first observing that with the exceptions of few dissimilarities in wording, the Lucan version of the LP (Luke 11:2b – 4) is reproduced in its entirety in Matthew’s. In such a case as this, it is argued that the shorter version is to be considered older because liturgical texts have a tendency to expand.¹³⁹ Second, all the additional petitions found in Matthew occur at the ends of the Lucan version. That is, the third petition follows right after the second and the (second part of the) sixth petition right after the fifth (i. e. is Luke’s fifth). Again, this is said to be characteristic of the growth of liturgical texts: “sie [lit Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 143; Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:436.  “Father” in Luke 11:2b is said to trace back to the Aramaic Abba in which case it has very early Christian witness in Paul’s Rom 8:15 and Gal 4:6. Which implies that the oldest Christians knew of it. See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:437; Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 142.  Even if one puts it on scribal activity, it seems usual for a scribe to extend a text than to shorten it (cf. Metzger, B. M., 1964, pp. 207– 219). See, however, John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 2005), 285., who thinks that Matthew’s longer invocation could be more original than Luke’s, considering Luke’s as a Lucan redaction of the invocation to fit Jesus’s manner of addressing God. A similar position is held by Clark, ‘Exploring Metaphors for the Reception History of the Lord’s Prayer’, 48.  See Matt 5:12, 16, 45; 6:1, 20; 7:11, 21, etc. Note that all these references are within the Sermon on the Mount, i. e. the initial macro context of the LP.  Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 12. Cf. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:436 – 37.

2.5 Synoptic comparison: Matthew, Luke (and Didache)

39

urgische Texte] lieben den volltönenden Abschluß.”¹⁴⁰ Lastly, the structure of the Matthean text itself is also characteristic of liturgical texts: greater symmetry, parallelism, etc.¹⁴¹ Therefore, granted that Matthew has a largely Judeo-Christian context, then these additions or rather enrichments to the LP in his Gospel are understandably right, for that is a context enormously rich in liturgical material on prayer¹⁴² among which are the Qaddish and the Eighteen Benedictions which, for their relevance in discussing the religious-historical context of the LP, will be considered later. The length-argument (with the short invocation) goes for Luke. But the wording-argument is for Matthew. The following observations underlie such an argument. First, in the bread petition, Matthew reads, τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον (“give us today our bread for the coming day”), but Luke has, τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν (“give us each day our bread for the coming day”). For Jeremias, Luke’s τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν is an extension of Matthew’s σήμερον which supports the conclusion that the Matthean wording could be older (or say original). The second observation is to be found in the fifth petition where Matthew reads, καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν (“forgive us our debts”) and Luke, καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν (“forgive us our sins”). One way of explaining this variation has been to assume an Aramaic original of the LP. In other words, granted that Jesus spoke Aramaic,¹⁴³ he might have then initially taught the prayer in Aramaic. Accordingly, Matthew’s use of “debts” could go back to an original Aramaic ḥoba (which translates as financial debt) used to designate sin.¹⁴⁴ Jeremias and his student, Eduard Lohse represent this viewpoint and have consequently sought to re-translate the LP back into Aramaic.¹⁴⁵ Following this view, it stands to reason that Luke would have replaced this rather unusual word in Greek with the common word for sin, τὰς ἁμαρτίας. That “debts” could be the initial word here finds support in its repetition in the second part of the petition in both Gospels.

 Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 12.  Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 143. Cf. James N. Neumann, ‘Thy Will Be Done: Jesus’s Passion in the Lord’s Prayer’, Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 1 (2019): 164– 65, https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1381.2019.524397.  See Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 12.  For Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 86. Jesus could have spoken Greek (in relation to Pontius Pilate), read Hebrew in the Synagogues and preached in Aramaic to the masses.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 13; see Jeremias, Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 14. See Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, 290.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 13 – 14; Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 143. See also Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 106.

40

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Still on the fifth petition, a further observation in the wording is that Matthew reads, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν (“as we also have forgiven our debtors”) and Luke reads, καὶ γὰρ αὐτοὶ ἀφίομεν παντὶ ὀφείλοντι ἡμῖν (“for we ourselves also forgive all those who owe us [something]”). The argument here is that the Matthean wording presents a more difficult formulation¹⁴⁶ because one could assume (wrongly) that the believers’ forgiveness becomes a model for God to emulate. Therefore, for Luke to prevent such an impression from being created in his audience, he chose to reformulate it using the present tense instead of the aorist. But the aorist form here, according to Jeremias, has its root in the Aramaic perfectum praesens (getting back to the Aramaic-original view above) which indicates an action taking place here and now. The preceding is a recapitulation of the old thesis which has been the majority scholarly view: that is, while Luke presents a more original version of the Lord’s Prayer in terms of its length and short invocation (the length-conclusion), Matthew offers a more original version in terms of the wording (in some points) of the text (the wording-conclusion). However, studies that treat the text in light of the Dead Sea Scrolls and other relevant Jewish sources caution that this thesis must not necessarily be taken as a final explanation of the textual situation of the LP since the Matthean additions in particular—“our Father,” “in heaven,” “will,” etc.—have earlier relevant parallels in Qumranic and rabbinic literature.¹⁴⁷ Nevertheless, the current exegesis follows the majority scholarly view without excluding the possibility that the additional petitions and formulations could be ‘original’ as well since the entire discussion on the subject remain largely hypothetical.

2.6 Form criticism, tradition and redaction history Form-critical questions here include the form of the LP before it appeared in Matthew and Luke as well as its Sitz im Leben. These questions have been addressed in passing in the previous discussions. The following, however, need reiteration. In accordance with the Q-explanation above, the assumption in this exegesis is that the LP was originally taught by Jesus¹⁴⁸ and that it could have been part of

 See Subsection 1.2 on textual criticism above.  So Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 97.  This position certainly is at variance with that taken by M. D. Goulder, “The Composition of the Lord’s Prayer,” Journal of Theological Studies; London 14 (January 1, 1963): 32– 45. While rejecting the “authorship” of Jesus, Goulder hypothesizes that, “Jesus gave certain teaching on prayer by precept and example, which was recorded for the most part by St. Mark. This was writ-

2.6 Form criticism, tradition and redaction history

41

the reconstructed Q 11:2b – 4¹⁴⁹ (oral or written form) which Matthew and Luke adapted in their respective Gospels. Moreover, the view is also taken here, based on the source-critical discussions above, that the Matthean version is an extension or rather an enrichment of the Lucan version.¹⁵⁰ Moreover, although the introductions given to the LP by both Evangelists are different and therefore obfuscate the original introduction to the text in Q, its form could qualify as part of the teachings of Jesus. Furthermore, it is a petitionary prayer (Bittgebet) in terms of genre, because, aside the invocation and the later added doxology, it consists mainly of petitions.¹⁵¹ Ursula Schattner-Rieser also notes that with the later addition of the doxology, the LP attains elements of a prayer of praise (Lobgebet). For this reason, Wilk considers the text as having an overlapping form (gattungsübergreifenden Text).¹⁵² How did this text function in its earliest context? Recalling the points of Frey and Wilk above, it could have first functioned as a private prayer of the disciples and second attained a liturgical function after Easter.¹⁵³ Consequently, the text at hand here is, form-critically, a petitionary prayer text which could have been either sung or recited in private prayers or collectively by the early church in its liturgy. Its main Sitz im Leben, accordingly, is its later usage in liturgy¹⁵⁴ by

ten up into a formal Prayer by St. Matthew, including certain explanations and additions in Matthean language and manner. St. Matthew’s Prayer was then abbreviated and amended by St. Luke.” He came to this position logically on the assumption that Luke had Matthew before him as he wrote his Gospel and that there is no existence of Q. These two assumptions are certainly diametrically opposed to what is held in this work.  See Robinson, Hoffmann, and Kloppenborg, The Critical Edition of Q, 206 – 8.  Further, even though Mark 14:32– 42 echoes parts of the LP, it is left open here as to whether the first Evangelist had knowledge of the LP or not. See Goulder, ‘The Composition of the Lord’s Prayer’; S. Van Tilborg, ‘A Form-Criticism of the Lord’s Prayer’, Novum Testamentum 14, no. 2 (1972): 94– 105, https://doi.org/10.2307/1560176.  Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 97.  Florian Wilk, ‘“Vater…”. Zur Bedeutung der Anrede Gottes als Vater in den Gebeten der Jesusüberlieferung’, in The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, ed. Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18, (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014), 217.  Considering that, as already seen in the textual analysis, the structure and style give the text a kind of rhythm that is partly hymnal, the text certainly assumed a liturgical status in the early church. See: Klaus Berger, Formgeschichte des Neuen Testaments (Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1984), 239 – 40.  Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q, 206. He argues that Q 11:2– 4 (including 11:9 – 13) has an “ecclesial rather than a missionary Sitz (…).”

42

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

the early church and it could have also been used in catechism for new converts as its position and function in the Didache suggest.¹⁵⁵ It follows from the foregoing that the tradition that traded the LP before its (redactional) state in Matthew (and even in Luke) transmitted the text in length as found in Luke (and in terms of formulation, as found in Matthew). Accordingly, the Matthean version with its extensions are probably (purely) redactional¹⁵⁶ granted 1) that Matthew is not completely reproducing the text as known to him in his community¹⁵⁷ and 2) that he did not use a different version of Q in which the text was already in the length and wording that he presents in his Gospel. If the above two hypotheses are granted, Matthew’s possible redactional activity is tenable in several ways. First, the location of the text in the context of the Sermon on the Mount and the introduction of the text with Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς (6:9a) go back to him. This finds further support by recalling that Luke places his text in a different context (not even in his corresponding Sermon on the Plain, Luke 6:20 – 49) and his occasion for introducing it is not in a great speech-teaching context (like Matt 5 – 7) with the subject matter being deeds of righteousness but on the occasion of an aftermath of a concrete prayer praxis of the Lord in which one of the disciples requests that Jesus teaches them to pray like John taught his disciples(Luke 11:1– 2a).¹⁵⁸ This redactional activity helps to achieve Matthew’s intention of inserting the text at that point of his Gospel: to provide an example of a right, succinct prayer to the Father who sees in secret with which the individual can distinguish his/her private prayer praxis from the hypocrites and the Gentiles.¹⁵⁹ Second, some of the specific additions  See Wehnert, ‘Ein Gebet für alle christliche Gemeinden: Zum Vaterunser in der Didache’. The text in the Didache indicates that the LP follows from Chapters 1– 6 which comprise teachings on the ‘Two Ways’: the Way to life and the Way to death—and Chapter 7 on Baptism. In Chapter 8 where the LP appears, there are also teachings on not only prayer but also fasting. Thereafter, Chapters 9 – 10 deal with the Eucharist and 11– 15 deal with ecclesiastical organisation and church discipline. The initial contents of the Didache according to Jeremias, Das VaterUnser im Lichte der neueren Forschung, 6 – 7., indicate those used for preparing people for Baptism, and therefore, for him, the LP was probably taught to these people and they could have prayed it after their baptism and admission into the Lord’s Supper.  Neumann, ‘Thy Will Be Done’, 167., has recently argued that “Liturgical features do not (…) preclude the possibility of redaction.” Which means a possible Matthean redaction of the text can still be argued for even if he is reproducing a liturgical text from his community.  Indeed, this point does not in itself exclude redaction as the placement of the text the Gospel context is itself redactional.  Admittedly, both contexts share the similarity of being in a prayer teaching context, but at the same time the difference is obvious in terms of how each Evangelist has chosen to introduce his text in his Gospel.  See subsection 2.4.4 above.

2.6 Form criticism, tradition and redaction history

43

to the text itself could be argued for considering Matthew’s literary style. For instance, the extension of the invocation, particularly ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς is typical of Matthew as 5:12, 16, 45; 6:1, 20; 7:11, 21, etc. attest.¹⁶⁰ In addition, the use of πονηρός in the last petition is also stylistically Matthean, for it appears 26 times¹⁶¹ in his Gospel; the highest in all the NT literature. Moreover, a Matthean redactional addition of the third petition (Matt 6:10b) is, however, initially difficult to explain (based on style alone). For the construction, γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου appears only here and in Matt 26:42 (and nowhere else in the NT). In Matthew 7:21, 12:50, 18:14 and 21:31 where τὸ θέλημα appears again, it is combined with other verbs, majority of which is ποιεῖεν. For this reason, S. van Tilborg has argued that Matt 6:10b could rather have been part of the LP before Matthew and thus not redactional.¹⁶² That notwithstanding, there are still good reasons to think that this additional petition could be traced back to Matthew’s redaction. J. N. Neumann sheds new light on the issue by discussing the relationship between Matt 6:10b and the Gethsemane story.¹⁶³ Following other commentators, he notes that γενηθήτω is particularly a form unique to Matthew accounting for its overwhelming majority usage (five out of seven¹⁶⁴) in the NT.¹⁶⁵ Furthermore, the already cited places above where θέλημα occurs suggest that the word belongs to Matthew’s vocabulary. For Neumann, the pairing of γενηθήτω and θέλημα does not appear in any documented Greek literature prior to Matthew and sources having this pairing are ones quoting either Matt 6:10 or 26:42.¹⁶⁶ This, coupled with the fact that ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς carries “Matthean flavour” just like the combination of ὡς…και¹⁶⁷ and the coupling of heaven and earth, leads him to conclude that, “In all probability, the additions to the Matthean version (…) should be attributed to the author’s own hand (…).”¹⁶⁸ The foregoing permits the admission that the arguments for a Matthean redaction of the text are strong. However, giving the realm of probabilities within

 Indeed, recent studies of the text in light of the Dead Sea Scrolls caution that Matthew’s extended invocation could as well go back to his sources since it is well witnessed in literature of the post-exilic Judaism since the Persian era. So Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 110.  Morgenthaler, Statistik des neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes, 134.  Van Tilborg, ‘A Form-Criticism of the Lord’s Prayer’, 96.  Neumann, ‘Thy Will Be Done’.  Matt 6:10; 8:13; 9:29; 15:28; 26:42, Acts 1:20; Rom 11:9.  Neumann, ‘Thy Will Be Done’, 167.  Neumann, 167.  Matt 6:10, 12; 20:14.  Neumann, ‘Thy Will Be Done’, 167– 68.

44

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

which the entire discussion operates, one should not rule out the possibility that the form of the Matthean text could also go back to his sources.

2.7 Religious-historical comparisons Research that investigates the religious-historical background to the LP indicates that its contents have significant parallels in the Jewish contexts. Regarding this, for instance, Schattner-Rieser has observed in her study that all expressions and formulations which characterise the Lord’s Prayer are partly witnessed (i. e. paralleled) verbatim (wörtlich) in the Targums.¹⁶⁹ Consequently, it is necessary here to consider some texts from the Jewish contexts within which the nascent church emerged¹⁷⁰ that display thematic and structural parallels to the LP. Before attending, however, to the Jewish parallel texts, some remarks on the Greco-Roman environment are important. Within traditional religion in this environment, prayer formed part of the daily religious activities that took place in temples for the furtherance of the public good. It also characterised popular religious expressions at private, individual levels. Thus, there was regular invocation of gods as characteristic of Graeco-Roman religious ethos.¹⁷¹ However, prayer, unlike in the Jewish and Christian contexts, was hardly an independent religious act: it always accompanied sacrifices to the gods. In this regard, prayer could function as the means to ask or even (as the situation may be) demand that the gods act reciprocally based on the sacrifices that have been offered them.¹⁷² The non-autonomous nature of prayer in this traditional religious setting leads Feldmeier to argue that there is no comparable or parallel lord’s prayer

 Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 135.  It is self-evident that the early (Jewish) Christians continued in their received Jewish practices like observing their three times daily prayers and meeting in synagogues after the ascension of the Jesus. See Acts 3:1, James 2:2 (mentions synagogue), and Ignatius exhorts the believers in his letter to Polycarb in 108 AD to continue their meetings in the synagogue (see Kistemaker, ‘Lord’s Prayer in the First Century’, 323.  Reinhard Feldmeier, ‘“Geheiligt werde dein Name”: Das Herrengebet im Kontext der paganen Gebetsliteratur’, in Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 266 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 27; Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 17; Joachim Jeremias, Abba: Studien zur neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zeitgeschichte (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966), 68.  Feldmeier, ‘“Geheiligt werde dein Name”: Das Herrengebet im Kontext der paganen Gebetsliteratur’, 28,30 – 31.

2.7 Religious-historical comparisons

45

in the Graeco-Roman religious setting.¹⁷³ The transactional, materialistic function of prayer within the popular religion was, however, criticised and rejected by the philosophical cycles.¹⁷⁴ They criticised especially petitionary prayer as selfish because it was about attempting to influence the gods to do one’s interests.¹⁷⁵ From the philosophical perspective, then, a proper function of prayer was a means through which one orients his entire life on the gods.¹⁷⁶ Thus, rather than asking the gods for one’s material wellbeing, one should seek to gain divine insight; in the case of the Stoics,¹⁷⁷ to know the divine logos that governs the cosmos.¹⁷⁸ The point from the above, therefore, is that prayer was a usual traditional religious act, even if its purpose was redefined fundamentally within the philosophical cycles. Another relevant point is that prayer in this setting took place in a polytheistic environment. However, when one turns to the Jewish setting, it is clear that “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deut 6:4). It is the one true God of Israel who was consistently invoked in prayer. The evidence of Judaism’s faithfulness in prayer is not only seen in the number of times one has to pray daily and the several prayers in the Psalms of the OT, but also in those prayers modelled after them in Judaism of the late antiquity and in those present among the Qumran scrolls. Lohse thus observes, “Vor allem in den “Lobliedern” der Gemeinde von Qumran (1QH) sind viele Beispiele überliefert, die zeigen, mit welcher Intensität im Judentum der Zeit vor Christus gebetet wurde.”¹⁷⁹ The Schema as quoted above already had its fixed place in the liturgy and was to be recited by individual Jews in their morning and evening prayers.¹⁸⁰ Beyond the custom of praying twice daily, also came, as found in  Feldmeier, 28.  On the understanding and function of prayer in ancient philosophical discussions, see Katrin Maria Landefeld, Die Gebetslehre Epiktets: Form, Inhalt Und Funktionen Der Gebete Epiktets Im Kontext Der Antiken Gebetstradition, Orbis Antiquus 54 (Münster: Aschendorff Verlag, 2020), 11– 72.  Feldmeier, ‘“Geheiligt werde dein Name”: Das Herrengebet im Kontext der paganen Gebetsliteratur’, 34– 36.  Feldmeier, 38. One should acknowledge that there were different understandings of prayer within the philosophical circles. See Landefeld, Die Gebetslehre Epiktets, 11– 72.  On prayer among the Stoics, see Landefeld, Die Gebetslehre Epiktets, 26 – 60.  Feldmeier, ‘“Geheiligt werde dein Name”: Das Herrengebet im Kontext der paganen Gebetsliteratur’, 38.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 18. “Particularly in the ‘praise songs’ of the Qumran community (1QH) many examples have been transmitted that depict the intensity with which prayers were made in Judaism before the time of Christ.” (my translation).  Lohse, 19; Jeremias, Abba, 69 – 70. Jeremias observes that not only were Jews taught right from young adulthood on how to pray, but also doing so by sun rise and sun set. The men and young people from 13 years onwards were under this requirement while the women and

46

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Dan 6:10, the tradition (before the time Jesus) of praying at specific times three times daily.¹⁸¹ Within these times, the Eighteen Benedictions, which will soon be considered in detail, was said, and unlike the Schema which was said twice daily and only by males, they were said by all: men, women, children and slaves.¹⁸² These three set times for daily prayer extended way into the NT and beyond as can be seen in Acts 3:1 (cf. 10:3, 30) and in Didache 8:3.¹⁸³ In all these prayers, one Deity is at the centre—YHWH (in the NT, the Father), the one and only God of Israel. Therefore, one sees here a background (to the NT) so rich in prayer and liturgical materials that Jeremias declares; “Jesu kommt aus einem Volk, das zu beten verstand.”¹⁸⁴ Given this background to Jewish prayer life albeit briefly presented,¹⁸⁵ consideration will now be given to a couple of the prayer texts from this background: the Eighteen Benedictions,¹⁸⁶ the Qaddish and the Trito-Isaiah text. Before considering these texts, however, attention needs to be drawn to concerns raised by Jörg Frey regarding the consideration of specifically the Eighteen Benedictions and the Qaddish as background texts to the LP. He sees two challenges in comparing the LP with these texts. First, he argues that dating these texts is extremely difficult and it is not clear which structure/form these texts had at the time of Jesus.¹⁸⁷ Second, for Frey, it is important to distinguish between private and public liturgical prayers. The LP was initially a private prayer of a group and only attained a public liturgical status after Easter. This, coupled with his observation of the difficulty associated with chronologically aligning the liturgical prayers of ancient Judaism because of the late fixation of their textual forms, makes comparing these texts with the LP problematic.¹⁸⁸ He dilates further on this second challenge that the Qaddish for e. g. landed in the liturgy

children and slaves were not. The determination of the times, morning and evening, took inspiration from Deut 6:5 – 7.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 19 – 20.  Jeremias, Abba, 71.  Both references indicate that even the Christians held unto this prayer time tradition.  Jeremias, Abba, 67; (See also Lohse, Vater Unser, 17). “Jesus comes from a people who understood [what it meant] to pray” (my translation).  For more details on this see, Jeremias, Abba, 67– 80.  Or the “Shemoneh Esreh” (Eighteen), “Tephillah” (Prayer) or ῾Amidah (Standing), for one prayed it standing. David Instone‐Brewer, ‘The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim before 70 CE’, The Journal of Theological Studies 54, no. 1 (1 April 2003): 25, https://doi.org/10.1093/ jts/54.1.25.  Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 7.  Frey, 7– 8.

2.7 Religious-historical comparisons

47

quite late and must therefore be dated later than the LP and that the Eighteen Benedictions achieved its relatively fixed form in the rabbinic era.¹⁸⁹ Consequently, for him, these challenges revoke the comparability of these texts as direct parallels to the LP.¹⁹⁰ Notwithstanding these challenges, however, there still is a basis to make these comparisons (even though that should be done with these difficulties in mind) because, in light of the difficulty which Frey has pointed out, the probability exists that forms of these texts could have circulated earlier than the period of their fixed forms. Marc Philonenko makes a similar argument by stating that “(…) aber (…) die jüngsten Gebete nehmen oft alte Formulierungen auf, so dass der Vergleich dennoch gültig bleibt.”¹⁹¹ In other words, later prayers pick up older formulations or wordings and therefore supports the need for the comparison. On that basis, the Eighteen Benedictions will be considered first. Eduard Lohse posited that this prayer could have existed in its oldest parts by the time of Jesus and the first Christians and later found its final composition by the end of the first century AD.¹⁹² In contrast, Schattner-Rieser, argues that it was put together as prayer later in the early centuries after the temple destruction.¹⁹³ This difficulty in dating the text is what Frey pointed to above. Against the background of shock from the Jewish war and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, it is intimated, Judaism under the leadership of the scribes saw the duty to keep in confession to the One God morning and evening and to pray the Eighteen Benedictions three times daily at set times of the day. The result was that the Eighteen Benedictions found a fixed place in the worship of Jewish communities and in the lives of individual devout Jews, just like the LP in Christian worship.¹⁹⁴ There are two recensions¹⁹⁵ of it: the Babylonian Recension and the

 Frey, 8; see also; Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 96 – 97.  Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 8.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 12.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 20. He indicates that the Eighteen Benedictions were extended to a 19th benediction (the so-called ‘Birkat haminim’) by the end of the first century AD. This was inserted at the twelfth position. Nevertheless, it still kept the name ‘Eighteen Benedictions.’ He further observes, “Die zusätzliche Benediktion sollte es insbesondere Judenchristen unmöglich machen, am Gottesdienst in den Synagogen teilzunehmen. Denn ein gegen sie gerichtetes Fluchwort konnten sie unmöglich mit “Amen” beantworten.”  Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 96.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 20; Werner Grimm, Die Motive Jesu: Das Vaterunser/kommentiert und ausgelegt, Biblisch-Theologische Grundlagen 1 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verl., 1992), 22.

48

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Palestinian Recension.¹⁹⁶ Outline-wise, the Eighteen Benedictions has the following structure: 1) three introductory benedictions forming a hymnal introit 1– 3, 2) twelve benedictions constituting the main parts 4– 9/10 – 15 and 3) three concluding benedictions of thanksgiving and blessing (16 – 18).¹⁹⁷ Both the Eighteen Benedictions and the LP display similarity in their function: both were meant to be prayed daily¹⁹⁸ and certainly three times daily as already noted. Moreover, both have two major divisions—the petitions that relate to the situation of the believer now and those of ‘later times.’ The difference here, however, is that while the LP puts the petitions relating to the future first, the Eighteen Benedictions does it the other way around.¹⁹⁹ Karl Georg Kuhn further observes that, in both prayers, the petition relating to bread stands at the turning point from one set of petitions to the other: “In beiden Gebeten steht am Wendepunkt von der einen zur anderen Hälfte die Brotbitte, im Vaterunser als Anfang des zweiten Teils, im Achtzehngebet entsprechend als Ende des ersten Teils.”²⁰⁰ Upon closer comparison of the two sections of the respective prayers, he concludes that while the “futuristic” petitions of the Eighteen Benedictions are national and historically oriented with Israel at the centre of it, the LP points to one event—the coming of the kingdom of God which is not just historical but marks the end of all histories.²⁰¹ In the discussions of the petitions later below, references will be made to this prayer again. Aside the Eighteen Benedictions, another important Jewish prayer that has significant parallels to the LP is the Qaddish. It is “an Aramaic prayer which formed the conclusion of every service in the synagogue.”²⁰² The Qaddish (in part) could have sounded as follows: “Hallowed be His great name in the world  See Instone‐Brewer, “The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim before 70 CE” who discusses the two recensions and especially also on the question of dating and the “Minim.”  Grimm, Die Motive Jesu, 22; Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 21; Instone‐Brewer, ‘The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim before 70 CE’, 28. Lohse indicates that the Palestinian Recension was found in a Geniza (i. e. a chamber) in Cairo at the end of the ninetieth century AD and was published in 1896 by S. Schechter.  Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, 10. Upon my own analysis of the Tephillah, I find Kuhn’s structure more appropriate than Grimm, Die Motive Jesu, 22.  Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, 40.  Kuhn, 40; Grimm, Die Motive Jesu, 22.  Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, 41. “In both prayers, the Bread petition stands at the turning point from the one to the other half; in the Lord’s Prayer at the beginning of the second part, in the Eighteen Benedictions respectively at the end of the first part” (my translation).  Kuhn, 41. Of course, one will have to acknowledge that Kuhn considers these petitions of the LP on eschatological levels.  Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 144.

2.7 Religious-historical comparisons

49

which He created according to His will. May His kingdom be established in your lifetime, speedily, soon, so say: Amen’.”²⁰³ Even though for C. A. Evans, the LP is Jesus’s adaptation of the Qaddish,²⁰⁴ Schattner-Rieser (as well as Frey) argues that the Qaddish came into being later than the LP and hence could not have inspired it.²⁰⁵ Nonetheless, as already indicated there is still merit in comparing the two texts. Similarities between the two are that “name,” “will” and “kingdom” of God in the LP are also found in the Qaddish. The difference though is that while the Qaddish was said by priests at the end of Synagogue worship²⁰⁶ and therefore qualifies in that context as a public prayer, the LP is presented as a private prayer (Matt 6:6)²⁰⁷ and (in later liturgical contexts) could have been recited collectively by worshippers. In addition, Philonenko has observed that God is not mentioned in the Qaddish except that his named is invoked, but in the LP he is directly addressed.²⁰⁸ Another remarkable difference between the two prayers is that whereas the Qaddish uses a third person perspective (in its first part), the LP uses the second person singular perspective in the You-Petitions. Consequently, the intimate character of the You-Petitions is highlighted.²⁰⁹ Besides, the kingdom petition in the Qaddish is clear on when God’s kingdom should be established: “in your lifetime.” But in the LP, that is not immediately clear.²¹⁰ Another comparable text worth considering is Trito-Isaiah 63:15 – 64:11²¹¹ which Werner Grimm considers as offering a corresponding form, historical place and theme to the LP.²¹² He posits that this prayer could be from 587 BC after the conquest of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple by the Babylonians. It divides thematically into three: 63:15 – 19b, 63:19c – 64:7 and 64:8 – 11. Important parallels to the LP are references to God three times as Father (2 in 63:16 and 1 in 64:7), to the name of God (63:16, 19; 64:1, 6), to forgiveness and de-

 Taken from Jeremias, 144.  Evans, Matthew, 145. Cf. Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 27– 28.  Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 97.  According to Lohfink, Das Vaterunser neu ausgelegt, 31., it was, in its old form, designed to close the Synagogue worship after the scripture exposition.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 28.  Philonenko, 28.  Philonenko, 29.  If one considers the usage of the aorist form and considers its aspect ‘now’, then one can argue that the kingdom should come now. But that is only upon close consideration and not right away explicit as in the Qaddish.  See Reinhard Feldmeier and Hermann Spieckermann, God of the Living: A Biblical Theology, trans. Mark E. Biddle (Waco, Tex: Baylor University Press, 2011), 60 – 62. for further discussion on this text in relation to God as Father.  Grimm, Die Motive Jesu, 19.

50

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

liverance. This allows Grimm to argue that, aside the bread petition, all other petitions (of this section of Trito-Isaiah) have parallels to the LP, so that it could be appreciated as a forerunner (Vorläufer) of the Lord’s Prayer.²¹³ The parallel texts show, then, that the content of the LP is not entirely a new invention within its original context but participates in the Jewish religious traditions at the time of Jesus.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός Beyond the foregoing historical critical considerations stands the fact that the text contains theologically pregnant words that require that some of them are diachronically and synchronically unpacked before each petition is discussed in detail. Accordingly, to ease the explanations of the invocation (Matt 6:9b), the fourth petition (Matt 6:11) and the fifth petition (Matt 6:13a), the following words will be discussed: father (πατήρ), ἐπιούσιος, temptation (πειρασμός).

2.8.1 Father (πατήρ) It was underscored under the contextual analysis above that the presentation of God mainly as “your heavenly Father” or “Father in heaven” in the Sermon on the Mount is central to Matthew’s theology. Given its theological importance, the concept will be analysed in light of the OT, Jewish, Greco-Roman and the larger NT contexts. This will, nonetheless, be done in an eclectic and condensed manner with focus on semantic features of the usages since many studies have been conducted on the subject.²¹⁴ The “Abba-Problem” which resulted from J. Jeremiah’s thesis that Jesus’ reference to God as Father is unique in light of the entire Jewish prayer literature has long been vehemently disputed and adequately corrected with several studies on Jewish literature including the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is, therefore, not nec-

 Grimm, 20 – 22. Hermann Spieckermann, ‘The “Father” of the Old Testament and Its History’, in The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, ed. Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18 (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 81 considers it as the ‘Our Father’ of the Old Testament.  See for instance the multidimentional approach to the subject in Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, eds., The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18 (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014).

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

51

essary to engage his thesis here.²¹⁵ Moreover, it has well been appreciated that the conception of God as Father has significant parallels not only in the OT but extensively also in Jewish texts of the Hellenistic-Roman period.²¹⁶ Consequently, in analysing this word, there is need to start from the OT. Compared to the NT, the OT scarcely uses the word “Father” in relation to God. When it applies the concept to YHWH, it distinguishes it from the contemporary usage in the Ancient Near Eastern religions where its usage could depict genealogical connections to the god being addressed.²¹⁷ In this context, the concept, which often appears in settings of prayer of lament and petition, seeks to reach the highest imaginable relationship with the invoked god in which the god’s mercy is sought. The concept in general represented, within the ancient orient, the absolute authority and mercy of the said god.²¹⁸ These two sides of the concept (i. e. absolute authority and mercy) find expression in its usage in the OT. For instance, father references to God in Deut 32:6 and Mal 2:10 consider him as creator just as such references in Ps 103:14 consider him as merciful.²¹⁹ The OT, however, makes a distinction in its application of the epithet. Surely, it consciously distances itself from the genealogical or biological connotation associated with the father epithet in the ancient orient and reserves divine fatherhood speech exclusively to Israel in the context of election.²²⁰ For instance, Israel is considered as God’s firstborn (by election) in Exod 4:22 and Deut 14:1, even if Israel continues to fail as a son in fulfilling its responsibilities in relation to this Father.²²¹ That notwithstanding, the OT also uses the concept in a father-son relationship between YHWH and the king (of Israel). This can be seen in the Jerusalemite royal theology in 2 Sam 7:14, 16 (cf. 1 Chr 17:1– 14; Ps 2:7) where the father epithet is used to designate the relationship of YHWH to the davidic king in which YHWH establishes and guarantees the continuous existence of the dynas-

 See among others Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-iüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’; Wilk, ‘“So sollt ihr Beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’, 83 – 85; Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 103 – 6; James H. Charlesworth, ‘A Caveat on Textual Transmission and the Meaning of Abba: A Study of the Lord’s Prayer’, in The Lord’s Prayer and Other Prayer Texts from the Greco-Roman Era, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Valley Forge, Pa: Trinity Press International, 1994), 1– 14.  Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 14.  Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 53; Cf. Jeremias, Abba, 15 ff.  Jeremias, Abba, 15 f.  Jeremias, 15 f.  Jeremias, 15 ff.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 32. Therefore the accusation in Mal 1:6.

52

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

ty.²²² This usage of the concept, however, seems to betray influences of a similar use in ancient Egypt where the national god, Anum, together with the spouse of the existing Pharaoh begets the successor.²²³ In Post-exilic royal theology, this usage is still sustained albeit in a context of suffering and experience of YHWH’s distance and silence, and therefore the call on YHWH as Father to act and show mercy (Ps 89; 103:13 – 14; Isa 63:7– 64:11). The usage of the concept increases clearly in Jewish texts of the HellenisticRoman time.²²⁴ There, God’s pedagogical guidance and his show of mercy belong constitutively to his paternal nature as Tobit 13:4 and Sirach 23:1– 6 indicate.²²⁵ Moreover, the Wisdom of Solomon (2:12– 14; 16 – 20) indicates that a righteous Jew could stand in father-son relationship to God but with suffering as its possible consequence. Moreover, regarding relevant evidence from Qumran, Lutz Doering has demonstrated that the predication of God as Father appears in statements of comparison (i. e. God compared to a father), adoption (God standing in father-son relationship to someone), identification (i. e. God identified as father), and in direct invocation in the context of prayer.²²⁶ Doering observes that the meanings associated with the concept of God as Father in the relevant Dead Sea Scrolls are related to God’s sustenance, support, mercy, kindness, forgiveness, rescue from enemies and non-abandonment, pedagogy, rebuke and castigation.²²⁷ The relevant texts in the context of direct invocation are Qumranic texts 4Q372 1 16 (the prayer of Joseph) and the personal prayer in 4Q460 9 I 2– 6.²²⁸ Furthermore, the witnesses of God as Father in the extra-biblical Jewish texts, according to Frey, express emotional attention and love, care

 Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 53 – 57.  Feldmeier and Spieckermann, 53 – 57.  Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 14; Wilk, ‘“Vater…”. Zur Bedeutung der Anrede Gottes als Vater in den Gebeten der Jesusüberlieferung’, 205.  See also Spieckermann, ‘The “Father” of the Old Testament and Its History’, 82; Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 63.  Lutz Doering, ‘God as Father in Texts from Qumran’, in The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, ed. Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18 (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014), 130.  Doering, 131– 32.  Doering, 125 – 30; Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 14.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

53

and patience.²²⁹ Considered together with the OT evidence above, then, the concept expresses God’s power and gracious, caring attention.²³⁰ When attention is shifted to the Greco-Roman religious context, an important background to the NT, there are references to god(s) as fathers. Indeed, in ancient Greece, Zeus was considered “the father of the gods and humanity” ²³¹ (πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε). Heinz-Günter Nesselrath has noted that the formula πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε appears twelve (12) times in Hommer’s Illiad and three (3) times in the Odyssey as a predicate to Zeus.²³² He observes that this reference to Zeus does not in its literal sense mean that Zeus is the creator of human beings (like the Jewish and Christian God) and therefore is their father neither does it mean he is the father of the gods because he is genealogically the first or earliest of the Greek gods.²³³ Nesselrath, therefore, contends that the epithet must have another qualitative meaning specifically in the mentioned Homeric epics. After analysing the evidence in Illiad, he observes that in some of the evidence in which Zeus is referenced as πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε his exaltedness above the other gods is in view, in other cases, however, his isolatedness or distance to them is the point, still in other contexts the predicate appears in situations in which Zeus actively steers the unfolding of events.²³⁴ One can therefore, deduce from Nesselrat’s analyses that the designation of Zeus as πατὴρ ἀνδρῶν τε θεῶν τε by Homer points to Zeus’ divine superiority and his power to influence the sequence of events among humans. Nonetheless, Nesselrath’s study also shows that aside this formulaic reference to Zeus in the Illiad, Zeus is also invoked as Father twenty-four (24) times in the Illiad where mostly it is human beings bringing their prayers, requests or wishes or even charges and complaints to him.²³⁵ This then points to his responsibility to care for those who invoke him as father. This sense of the concept according to Nesselrath refers to role of the father as head of a household and because of that having the responsibility to care for members of the household. He, therefore, understands the concept in

 Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 14.  Cf. Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 218.  Reference in relation to Homer in Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 85.  Heinz-Günther Nesselrath, ‘“Vater Zeus” im griechischen Epos’, in The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, ed. Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18 (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014), 37.  Nesselrath, 37.  Nesselrath, 41– 42.  Nesselrath, 42– 43.

54

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

the Homeric context to be a dominion concept and not one that is connected to closeness of relationship or love.²³⁶ In Platonism and Stoicism, the concept has universal connotations. For instance, Philo, in designating God as Father, does so with him not only being Creator and Sustainer, but ultimately “Father of the universe.”²³⁷ Other Platonist in engaging Plato’s conception of God as father and creator in Timaeus (28c3 – 5) either relates the predicate to two gods in which the father concept relates to the first god who is transcendent and has no relationship to the creation of the world—Numenius—or to one and the same god who has two different functions in which the father concept relates to the god’s creation of the soul of the world (Weltseele)—Plutarch.²³⁸ The latter Middle Platonic conception of Plutarch is based on the idea that the cosmos consists of two natures, the body and the soul. The god considered as father begot the soul and gave it a part in himself.²³⁹ The father concept here therefore has creatorship dimension in which what the god-father has begotten receives an essential part of the father. That aside, Platonism and Stoicism further link personal qualities like “loving care and gentleness to the god described as father.”²⁴⁰ This philosophical understanding of divine fatherhood could have set the intellectual background to its usage in the NT. This is the observation Franco Ferrari makes when he argues that, “Es besteht jedoch kein Zweifel darüber, dass die mittelplatonische Exegese von Platons Stelle mittelbar oder unmittelbar einen Einfluss auf die christliche Lehre hatte.”²⁴¹ In NT, the concept, father, appears 415 times (with almost about 250 relating to God); 64 occurring in Matthew, 18 in Mark, 56 in Luke and 137 in John.²⁴²

 Nesselrath, 43. See the pp. 44– 54 for the rest of his analyses of the concept in the Odyssey and other epics.  Cited in Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 86.  Franco Ferrari, ‘Gott als Vater und Schöpfer: Zur Rezeption von Timaios 28c3 – 5 bei einigen Platonikern’, in The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, ed. Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18 (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014), 59, 65 – 68.  Ferrari, 67.  Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living.  Ferrari, ‘Gott als Vater und Schöpfer: Zur Rezeption von Timaios 28c3 – 5 bei einigen Platonikern’, 69.  Morgenthaler, Robert, Statistik des neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes, 3rd ed. (Zürich: Gotthelf, 1982), 130; cf. Michel, O., “Πατήρ,” in Exegetisches Wöterbuch zum Neun Testament, 3rd ed. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2011), 125. The frequency here includes references to God as well. The frequency of the word in relation to God only is as follows: Matthew 45, Mark. 4, Luke 17, and John 115; see Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 53.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

55

In an exclusively Christological context, father speech about God in the NT initially depicts the special relationship between Jesus and God and thereafter, through Jesus, God and believers. Therefore, Reinhard Feldmeier and Hermann Spieckermann observe that, “Three elements (…) constitute the use of the Father metaphor in the New Testament (…): the Christological mediation of fatherhood through the Son, the soteriological implication in the form of status as children of God, and the ethical consequences of a life defined as ‘children of obedience’ (1 Pet 1:14).”²⁴³ The Christological mediation of God’s fatherhood here is therefore important. For it is only by their incorporation “in Christ” (to use a Pauline term) that the disciples (and indeed all believers) can obtain status of “children of God,” the proof of which is that God has given them the Spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15) or the Spirit of his Son (Gal 4:6) by whom they are able to call God as Father. This status converts them dramatically from “slaves” to “heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ” (Rom 8:15 – 17) and allows them to participate in his divine nature and vitality. The concept experiences a further expansion by the time of 1 Pet 1:23 – 2:3 where metaphors of (re)birth and nursing add maternal elements to the speech of God as Father.²⁴⁴ Not only that, but also Rom 8:19 – 23 already suggests a cosmic dimension to the concept of God’s fatherhood. Admittedly, the Christological mediation of sonship and through that the invocation of God as Father as presented above finds such clear Christologically predicated expression in Paul’s letters and in John’s Gospel.²⁴⁵ Wilk draws attention to this point after analysing the invocation of God as Father in Jesus’ prayers as found in the Jesus tradition. In his analysis, he considers the Gethsemane prayer using Mark 14:32– 42, the joyous cry of Jesus in Matt 11:25 – 27//Luke 10:21– 22 and the Lord’s Prayer (our study text). In the Gethsemane case, he comes to the conclusion that Jesus’ invocation of God as “Abba Father” (using both terms) points to the double-sidedness of the concept: one the one hand, God is by this presented as one whom the praying person can expect help and, on the other hand, to whose will the person is bound.²⁴⁶ In other words, God’s power and willingness to save and the individual’s own obedience to God’s will are expressed by the double designation of God as “Abba Father” in the earliest canonical Gospel. In the Q material represented by Matthew

 Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 67.  Feldmeier and Spieckermann, 79; cf O Hofius, ‘Vater (Πατήρ)’, in Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament (Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus Verlag, 2000).  Wilk, ‘“Vater…”. Zur Bedeutung der Anrede Gottes als Vater in den Gebeten der Jesusüberlieferung’, 220 – 21.  Wilk, 209 – 10.

56

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

and Luke, Wilk observes that the invocation of God as Father points to God’s merciful eschatological attention to the “infants” in Israel through the deeds of power done by and made possible through Jesus.²⁴⁷ When he considers the Lord’s Prayer, he draws the conclusion that the invocation of God as Father there makes it clear that as Father, God allows his name to be hallowed, sets up his kingdom on earth, takes care of the worry for nourishment of the praying disciples, forgives their sins and preserves them before temptation. And in all this he demonstrates himself as king, creator, reconciler and deliverer.²⁴⁸ Ultimately, the invocation of God as Father in the Lord’s Prayer combines essential aspects of God’s relationship to the praying persons.²⁴⁹ In light of all the data on God’s fatherhood in the synoptic tradition on Jesus’ prayer that he considered, Wilk concludes that the fatherhood in this context contain key implications as follows: 1) that the one who invokes God as father, God keeps in a relationship which God himself establishes between him and the person, 2) the person orients him/herself on God’s eschatological counsel (will) and 3) finally, the person expresses God’s power and goodness.²⁵⁰ The foregoing views especially that of Wilk provide relevant analyses of the NT data on the concept of God’s fatherhood on which to anchor the final part of the word analysis by looking at its use within Matthew’s Gospel. The point was made above that the father epithet has theological significance in the hands of Matthew. As noted earlier, he uses the concept in relation to God more frequently than his co-Synoptics. The immediate observation, to recall a point initially made, is that he uses it to avoid mentioning the divining name. Instead of God (which he uses less frequently, fifty-one times, compared to for e. g. Luke, 122 times), he uses expressions like “your/my/our Father in the heavens” (e. g. 5:16), “your heavenly Father” (e. g. 5:48) or simply “your Father” (e. g. 6:4).²⁵¹ One thing is obvious here: Matthew qualifies his Father concept with the personal possessive pronouns like “my,” “your,” and “our.” For Bormann, through this, Matthew highlights the relational aspects between Father and his family.²⁵² That raises the question of the semantic aspects of the concept in the Gospel. Feldmeier and Spieckermann have noted that the word thematically depicts di-

     

Wilk, 215. Wilk, 218. Wilk, 220. Wilk, 220. Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 272. Bormann, 273.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

57

vine attention and demand.²⁵³ The divine attention means his gracious care and mercifulness. At the same time, it is part of Matthew’s understanding of the concept that God as Father also means God is king. This is implied in the second petition of the LP, 6:10a. Consequently, one should conclude in agreement with Bormann that the concept in Matthew’s Gospel expresses God’s power/majesty and mercy/tender-heartedness.²⁵⁴ This understanding certainly accords with that which has been seen in the Jewish context as noted above. Given the relational character of the concept, however, there is need to ask the question in relation to whom is God presented “heavenly Father” or “Father in the heavens.” The is question is answered by Feldmeier and Spieckermann’s point initially stated that the fatherhood of God in Matthew refers to divine demand as well. That demand is on those who address God as Father. They are children of God which in the context of the Sermon on the Mount are first the disciples Jesus has called and beyond them the crowds that are listening at the background to the teaching especially those of them who will accept the message of Jesus and follow him. The demand on the children is to pursue a “greater righteousness” (Matt 5:20) which has been explained to mean the will of God which is revealed in Jesus’ interpretation of the Tora (especially in the antitheses of the Sermon on the Mount). This is central to Matthew’s ethics. Pursuing the demanded greater righteousness includes not only concrete deeds such as loving and praying for one’s enemies as an imitation of the heavenly Father (5:44– 45), doing acts of righteousness in the secret, but more also the motive behind the concrete deeds.²⁵⁵ In sum, Matthew’s use of the word, father (ὀ πατήρ), in relation to God reveals his theological conception of God as one who gives his gracious, caring attention to those who are called by Jesus and through his teaching follow him as disciples and to his entire creation (Matt 5:45; 6:25 – 32). Ultimately, it represents his power and tender mercy and care. Such a theological conception of the word by Matthew has ethical implications for those designated as children of the heavenly Father; they are called to pursue a greater righteousness, i. e. to do God’s will revealed in Jesus’ teaching. This understanding is important for the study text, Matt 6:9 – 13, which presents God as “our Father.”

 Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 79.  Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 275.  Cf. Bormann, 284– 85.

58

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

2.8.2 ἐπιούσιος If the Father epithet allowed for easy diachronic and synchronic analysis to be done on it, the present word makes such an analysis extremely difficult if not impossible. For no other NT word poses (at a linguistic level) such an exegetical difficulty as the hapax legomenon ἐπιούσιος, because it only occurs twice in the entire NT, all in the two accounts of the LP in Matthew and Luke and the third appearance outside the NT is found also in the LP in Didache 8:2. Even though it is not found in the LXX, some have suggested a possible association with the manna story of Exod 16 which narrates God’s giving of daily bread (manna) to Israel and to Prov 30:7– 9 where the petitioner inter alia asks that God feeds him with the food he needs. This shall, however, be considered in detail later. Outside Christian literature, ἐπιούσιος is not witnessed in the entire literature of classical antiquity except in a purported Greek inscription and a papyrus²⁵⁶ of a “householder’s account-book listing the purchase of provisions.”²⁵⁷ These two extra-Christian sources have, however, been discounted upon further analysis.²⁵⁸ One is, therefore, left with the witness in the LP to make out the meaning of this adjective.²⁵⁹ One helpful way out is considering possible linguistic derivations of the word as follows. As an adjective, ἐπιούσιος could be derived from either: 1. επ + ιούσιος, i. e. from εἶμι (ἴεναι, “to go” or “to come”) 2. or επι + ούσιος, i. e. from εἰμι (εἶναι, “to be”).²⁶⁰ The first derivation goes back to ἐπιέναι where ἐπι is the time indicator. It will therefore specifically be ἡ ἐπιοῦσα ἡμέρα, a feminine participial construction

 This is a late papyrus text from fifth century AD found in Upper-Egypt. The specific reference is about an expenditure of ½ Obol επιους (…), which could be completed to επιουσιων from τα επιουσια—which could approximately mean “a daily ration.” See W Foerster, ‘Ἐπιούσιος’, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 1964), 591; and Lohse, Vater Unser, 62.  Metzger, “How Many Times Does ‘Epiousios’ Occur Outside the Lord’s Prayer?,” 52; see also, Foerster, TDNT 2:591.  For detail account on these two sources see Metzger, ‘How Many Times Does “Epiousios” Occur Outside the Lord’s Prayer?’  See Colin Hemer, ‘Έπιούσιος’, Journal for the Study of the New Testament 7, no. 22 (October 1984): 81– 94, https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X8400702205 who presents a detailed diachronic analysis of the word.  H. Bourgoin, (1979), 91– 96. cited in Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:132.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

59

meaning, “the next day.”²⁶¹ It is noted that ἡμέρα often has its meaning absorbed in ἡ ἐπιοῦσα and, therefore, does not appear. ἡ ἐπιοῦσα then becomes the substantive from which the adjective could be derived.²⁶² Translation from this derivation will subsequently be, “(…) the bread for the next/coming day,” whereby “day” here, according to François Bovon, could be either “today” or “tomorrow” depending on whether one sees it from historical or eschatological perspectives.²⁶³ Luz considers this derivation as the only one linguistically possible and it also has more witnesses in the Hellenistic and NT periods just as it is further supported by the Gospel of the Nazarenes from the first half of the second century.²⁶⁴ Examples of NT witnesses include: Acts 7:26; 16:11; 20:15; 21:18; 23:11 and is common with Josephus as well.²⁶⁵ On the other hand, if one considers the second derivation, i. e. επι-ούσιος and takes it from the substantive ἡ οὐσία, then the bread being requested for in the fourth petition will be one necessary for our existence, being or essence.²⁶⁶ The interpretation will therefore be “that upon which our existence depends,” favoured by Origen, Chrysostom and Jerome.²⁶⁷ Such interpretation could have spiritual connotations as well,²⁶⁸ especially with St. Jerome’s Latin translation of it as “supernatural bread” (i. e. “supersubstantial”²⁶⁹). Against this derivation, however, stands the philological challenge that the combination of ἐπί εἶναι should result in the ellipsis of the iota (ι).²⁷⁰ Consequently, this derivation falls short linguistically. Beyond these two major derivations, other attempts have been to trace the adjective to ἐπι τήν οὖσαν ἡμεράν, in which case ἐπιούσιος will mean, “(…) für den heutigen Tag” (“for the present day”).²⁷¹ It is, however, objected that without

 H. Bourgoin, (1979), 91– 96. cited in Bovon, 2:132; cf. Foerster, TDNT 2:592; Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:451.  Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:132.  Bovon, 2:133.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:451.  See footnote 14 in TDNT 2:592.  See Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:132– 33; Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:450; Foerster, TDNT 2:593 – 95.  John D. K. Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, Journal of African Christian Thought 10, no. 2 (December 2007): 49.  Cf. Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:132.  St. Jerome, Book One (Matthew 1.1 – 10.42), trans. Thomas P. Scheck, The Fathers of the Church 117 (Washington, D.C: Catholic University of America Press, 2010), 88.  See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:450; Lohse, Vater Unser, 63; Foerster, TDNT 2:593 – 95.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:450.

60

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

ἡμέρα the expression, ἐπι τήν οὖσαν ἡμέραν is hardly used to mean “für den heutigen Tag.”²⁷² In this case, the petition will be asking for “bread for the present day” which will be alluding to the manna story of Exod 16.²⁷³ The allusion to the manna story is one that Philonenko considers important to understanding the word since for him the Greek text is not enough basis to decipher its meaning.²⁷⁴ Subsequently, he draws on the hypothetical Aramaic re-translation of the text and considers it in light of relevant Palestinian Targums with the results that the adjective means “for tomorrow.”²⁷⁵ Further, a recent contribution to the discussion is Schattner-Rieser who, like Philonenko, looks at the word in the Jewish background drawing on Qumranic materials and Targums. She posits that the word could mean, “what is necessary every day” (das Tag für Tag Nötige), which she considers is a combination of the two etymological derivations above; that is, both that which is necessary and for the coming day.²⁷⁶ Consequently, she argues that the word is connected to the manna story. The significant observation here is that, Philonenko’s analysis, unlike that of “for the present day,” leads to the same result as the first etymological analysis above, i.e. “for the next/coming day” while Schattner-Rieser goes a step further to combine the two derivations into one. Thus both researchers in attempt to establish a link to the manna story come to similar understanding of the adjective like the first derivation. That aside, another attempt has tried to see ἐπιούσιος in ἐπιέναι (i.e. from the first derivation above) in terms of τὸ ἐπιόν indicating the future. Consequently, the bread prayed for in this view will be one for the future; possibly what will be eaten in the eschaton (Mark 14:25; Matt 8:11; Luke 22:30).²⁷⁷ As can be seen from the foregoing analysis, different philological attempts have been made to understand the root of the word. Such attempts result in at least five interpretations of the bread petition: 1) bread for the following day, 2) bread necessary for our existence, 3) bread for today and 4) bread for the future²⁷⁸ and 5) bread necessary for our everyday existence (Schattner-Rieser’s thesis). Clearly, there is no single consensus on what the precise meaning of ἐπιούσιος is in the text. The translation of the text used in this present study, however,

 Foerster, TDNT 2:594; cf. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:450.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:450; cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 64.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 77.  Philonenko, 80.  Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 122.  See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:451.  Cf. Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, 49.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

61

follows point 1) which has a majority scholarly support and a strong philological basis.

2.8.3 Temptation (πειρασμός) Similarly, πειρασμός is equally less witnessed outside the biblical literature. It has only three witnesses in non-biblical accounts.²⁷⁹ It is a derivative of πειράζειν which means, among others, “to tempt,” “to try,” “to test,” “to put on trial,” etc.²⁸⁰ Hence the substantive could mean, “temptation,” “test,” “trial,” etc. It is instructive to note that temptation and test/trial could have different meanings in English just as in German (Versuchung and Prüfung).²⁸¹ Temptation could be considered negative and test/trial positive. While the Greek word does not make this distinction by itself, the various contexts of its usage do. This will be seen in the following discussion. Regarding its limited appearance in classical Greek, Lohse opines the possibility that the idea of divine temptation was alien to Greek thinking.²⁸² The opposite is, however, the case when one turns to the OT and ancient Judaism. In this context, both the positive and negative senses of the word can be deduced. The positive sense is that God tries or tests his chosen people (Israel) as well as individuals. In both cases—Israel as a people or an individual like Abraham—the aim of such trial is self-evident: God wants to prove the obedience or otherwise; faith and trust or otherwise of his people.²⁸³ The giving of the manna in Exod 16:4 is YHWH’s way of putting Israel’s obedience in keeping his instruction to test.²⁸⁴ In the same way, Judges 2:22– 23 reveals that it was part of God’s testing Israel’s obedience that he left some of the heathens in the promised land. Moreover, YHWH tests individuals too. In this regard, a classic example is Abraham as the narrative in Gen 22:1– 19 indicates. In asking Abraham to sacri-

 H Seesemann, ‘Πειρασμός’, in Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, ed. Gerhard Friedrich (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1959), 24.  Reinhard Feldmeier, The First Letter of Peter: A Commentary of the Greek Text, trans. Peter H. Davids (Waco, Tex: Baylor University Press, 2008), 81., observes that the verb in profane Greek meant “test” or “try.” This sense can be seen in the NT in Acts 9:26; 16:7; 24:6, he further observes.  Cf. Jan Milič Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990), 130.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 77.  See Lohse, 79; Seesemann, TWNT 6:24– 27.  The LXX word used here is πειράσω.

62

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

fice his only son to him, the interest of God was clear: he is not looking for human sacrifice but to search out the existence of true obedience, faithfulness and the fear of YHWH in Abraham. Abraham passes this divine test and remains thereafter the classic example (or say role model²⁸⁵) in the years following as one who was tested by and approved of God as obedient and God fearing (see 1 Macc. 2:52; Sir 44:20). Not only here, but the rabbinic tradition also holds, in relation to test, Abraham as an example.²⁸⁶ The question of πειρασμός (coming from God) receives a new twist in the wisdom literature where the perception is that God’s trial of persons is part of his pedagogical means of bringing such persons up or instructing them (see Wis 3:5 – 6; 11:9 – 10; cf. Sir 4:17). A similar sense is found in Judith 8:27. Judith underlines that God scourges those close to him as an admonishment. Therefore, God’s trial of humans has positive implications. Possibly for this reason, the Psalmist prays, “Search me, O God, and know my heart; test me and know my thoughts. See if there is any wicked way in me and lead me in the way everlasting” (Ps 139:23 – 24). But πειρασμός as temptation ²⁸⁷ is directly opposite the case. Take for instance the narrative in Gen 3:1– 19. In this narrative, even though the word πειρασμός does not appear directly, the motif of temptation is present. The Snake’s aim of luring Eve (and Adam) to eat of the tree in the middle of the Garden is not to prove their obedience to and fear of God, but precisely the opposite. Similarly, when one considers the story of Job, the aim of the Satan to be allowed to tempt Job by bringing his obedience to test is in the negative sense. It is further evident in the OT and later Judaism that God could be and was tempted by human beings too. A classical instance in this regard is Exod 17:1– 7 (LXX) where out of thirst for water the Israelites quarrelled with Moses and thereby tempted the Lord (πειράζετε κύριον). Having been subsequently provided with water, that place was named Πειρασμός (the word under consideration!) καὶ Λοιδόρησις.²⁸⁸ In Acts 5:9 (of the NT), Ananias and his wife are also said to tempt the Spirit of God by secretly withholding part of the money they earned from selling their possessions. The point of humans tempting God, in all these

 Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 78.  Lohse, 78; Seesemann, TWNT 6:26 – 27.  According to Feldmeier, The First Letter of Peter, 82., it (temptation) can be understood “exclusively negatively as an overpowering threat to faith that a person is unable to withstand unless divine preservation protects him (…).”  Cf. Deut 6:16; 9:22.

2.8 Word analysis: πατήρ, ἐπιούσιος, πειρασμός

63

cases, is an indication of unbelief, disobedience and doubt which are strikingly opposite the aim of God testing humans.²⁸⁹ Philo and Josephus do not seem to use πειρασμός directly but they, especially Philo have a view on it: he shares the understanding of the wisdom literature about the instructional and upbringing import of trial—God uses it to instruct and bring up his chosen ones.²⁹⁰ Moreover, the sense of πειρασμός is evident in the scripts of the Essenes. Their understanding falls into a dualistic view of the world where the believer is in constant fight between darkness and light and the spirit of iniquity is ceaselessly trying to draw the believer into darkness.²⁹¹ Here the understanding of temptation is that it comes from the Satan—it has the precise aim of seducing the individual away from God. In the NT, the usage of πειρασμός poses a theological challenge, especially in the sixth petition of the LP, where the word under analysis appears. The theological challenge there is whether God can lead people into temptation or trial. James 1:13 is explicit on this: God cannot be tempted with evil neither does he tempt anyone. However, one is tempted precisely by one’s own evil desires. Inasmuch as James does not think temptation comes from God but from human evil desires, he seems to hold a positive view of it: in 1:2– 4, trial has a positive impact on one’s faith—it works out endurance which consequently yields maturity and completeness.²⁹² In a similar manner, 1 Tim 6:9 – 10 holds the view that one’s desire for money can lead one into temptation because such desire for money is the root of all evil. Certainly, James further thinks that trial also occasions the opportunity for one to be awarded with a crown of life by the Lord, especially when one endures it (1:12). This view of trial held by James is similarly expressed in 1 Peter 1:6 – 7 where trial serves as a furnace that refines faith which is more precious than gold whose worth is normally revealed in furnaces (see also 1 Pet 4:12– 13). Paul on his part seems to suggest that πειρασμός may not come from God but he is able to, at the occasion of πειρασμός, provide a way out for the victim (1 Cor 10:13²⁹³). Likewise, in 2 Pet 2:9 – 10 it is God who knows how to rescue the godly from trial and keep the ungodly for the day of judgment. If God can do this,

 Seesemann, TWNT 6:26 – 27.  Seesemann, TWNT 6:26 – 27.  Seesemann, TWNT 6:26 – 27.  cf. Feldmeier, The First Letter of Peter, 82.  Feldmeier, 83., notes that, in this verse, Paul differentiates between “a human temptation, which apparently up to then had been withstood by the Corinthians, and a temptation that goes “beyond your ability” and from which God himself must defend them.”

64

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

could that help in understanding the usage of πειρασμός in Matt 6:13? Could the petition assume God’s ability to steer the way of the believer out of temptation that could lead him/her away from God? Within Matthew’s Gospel,²⁹⁴ πειρασμός comes a second time in Matt 26:41 (the Gethsemane scene; Mark 14:38; Luke 22:40, 46) where Jesus admonishes the disciples to pray in order not to come into temptation. The predicate (πειράζειν) occurs in various forms in Matt 4:1, 3; 16:1; 19:3; 22:18, 35. Interestingly, in all these instances the object of the temptation is Jesus and the aim is clearly not positive—it desires to cut him in on his God given mission. Therefore, together with its predicate, the substantive in Matthean usage has more of this negative sense. This suggests that whatever that temptation is, it must be avoided (through prayer). Luke conceives it as an “an appointed time of testing” that brings about the falling away of those who have shallow roots in God’s word (Luke 8:13). That aside, the motif of πειρασμός finds an eschatological dimension in Mark 13 and Rev 3:10 where it is linked to a period characterised by great tribulation and monstrous aggression by evil especially against the saints with the same aim of apostasy and betrayal; departing from God. The assurance of Rev 3:10 is that the saints would be kept from trial as a result of their patient faithfulness to the Lord. Lastly, when one considers the temptation story of Jesus (Mark 1:12; Matt 4:1– 11//Luke 4:1– 13), it is interesting that it is the Spirit (and by implication God) who leads²⁹⁵ Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. Here too, the aim of the temptation (from the side of the Tempter) is clear: it will want to have Jesus disobey and become unfaithful to the divine assignment (just like the first Adam). Therefore, the sense of the temptation is not a positive one to rejoice about, especially if one falls into it. The foregoing data therefore allows the assumption that the πειρασμός in the study text is not the one that God puts the faithfulness and obedience of his own to test but could be the other sense of πειρασμός which would draw them away from God especially when they cannot withstand it. Hence, the prayer to God who possesses the ability to help avert such eventuality.

 The predicate (πειράζειν) occurs in various forms in Matt 4:1, 3; 16:1; 19:3; 22:18, 35. Interestingly, in all these instances the object of the temptation is Jesus and the aim is clearly not positive—it desires to cut him in on his God given mission. Therefore, together with its predicate, the substantive in Matthean usage has more of this negative sense.  Mark’s usage is quite forceful (1:12): Καὶ εὐθὺς τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτὸν ἐκβάλλει εἰς τὴν ἔρημον (“And immediately, the Spirit casts him out into the desert”).

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

65

2.9 Explanation of the petitions The foregoing provides the needed synchronic and diachronic data for the elucidation of each petition in the text which is the task of the ensuing subsections.

2.9.1 Invocation: Our Father who is in the heavens The invocation makes it clear up front the kind of God being addressed here: one that the disciples can address as “Our Father.”²⁹⁶ The point of him being in heaven(s),²⁹⁷ on the one hand, only seeks to distinguish him from any association with earthly fathers.²⁹⁸ On the other hand, it reflects the contemporary (Jewish) understanding that the godhood resides in heaven.²⁹⁹ Besides, God, being the Father, needs no further detailed discussion as that has already been done above. As noted there, however, the usage of the concept in Matthew generally depicts God’s attention and demand in terms of his power, care and tender mercy on the one hand, and the ethical implications of this divine attention to the disciples as children on the other hand. The associated ethical requirements are encapsulated in the call to pursue a “greater righteousness.” With this loaded sense of God as Father in mind, the disciples have (or should have) genuine assurance, trust and confidence that their petitions will be heard by God, because he also possesses foreknowledge of their needs and is aware that they indeed need what they are asking for (Matt 6:8, 32). Moreover, the assurance, trust and confidence are strengthened by the fact that the Father

 For Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:126., the reality of what is designated Father (of God) incorporates what a mother is to her kids and what a woman can do. This understanding could help alley any fears of feminist theologians who warn against patriarchal character of the fatherhood of God. For already, Musa W. Dube Shomanah, ‘Praying the Lord’s Prayer in a Global Economic Era’, The Ecumenical Review 49, no. 4 (1 October 1997): 444, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-6623.1997.tb00307.x., in explicating the significance of praying the Lord’s Prayer in a global economic era, argues that the invocation of God as Father in the prayer depicts the “heavens as a realm of patriarchal power” which, to her, hardly suggests “a liberating vision for women who have suffered (…) gender exclusion and subordination.” For Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 60. the possessive pronoun reinforces the togetherness of the believers with their God in which the “our Father” further underlines that this heavenly Father is not a private God.  This is typically Matthean. See the discussion in Section 2.5 above.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 31. Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:126. is of the view that, theology, insofar as it is about the Father, can help illuminate the earthly fatherhood.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 33.

66

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

cares even for the least of all his creation—the flowers of the field and the birds of the air (Matt 6:26 – 29)—and certainly cares much more (Matt 6:30) for those who invoke him as “our Father.” Not only that, but also, “If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in the heavens (ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς) give good [things] to those who ask him?” (Matt 7:11). The assurance of being heard by God is not based on this only, but on the fact that God’s fatherhood also includes his power which is essential to hallowing his name, setting up his kingdom, doing his will and preservation in times of temptation and evil. This entire sense of God as Father in the invocation serves, consequently, as the premise on which the following petitions themselves are made and then should be understood.

2.9.2 First petition: May your name be hallowed The import of this petition hangs on the verb ἁγιασθήτω (“be hallowed”) and the substantive τὸ ὄνομα (“name”). An important question that can unlock its interpretation is whether the subject of the verb is God (the Father) himself or the believers (i. e. human beings) or both God and the supplicants.³⁰⁰ This will guide attempts here to explicate this petition. To begin with, it is worth recalling the Jewish prayer, Qaddish that was discussed earlier. As already noted, the first line states: “Hallowed be His great name in the world which He created according to His will.” The petition under discussion here corresponds obviously to this line of the Qaddish.³⁰¹ In both cases, the desire of the petitioners is that God’s name will be hallowed or held in reverence.³⁰² The only difference is one of perspective: while the Qaddish employs the third person’s perspective thus making it indirect, the LP uses a direct form of speech: “your Name be (…).” The petition also parallels the third benediction of the Eighteen Benedictions that was discussed above: “You are holy, and revered is your Name, and there is no God beside you. Blessed are you Lord, the holy God.”³⁰³ Here, unlike in the LP, the benediction confesses what is true about God and his name: he is holy and therefore his name is to

 See 2.4.2 above.  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 39.  In both cases too, the verbs stand at the beginning of the petition, for which reason Lohse, 40. observes that the Greek version of the LP goes back to an original Aramaic form.  Translation taken from Instone‐Brewer, ‘The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim before 70 CE’, 29 – 30. Emphasis mine.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

67

be revered.³⁰⁴ It would not, however, be wrong to postulate that, it is precisely because he is holy and his name ought to be revered that is why Jesus teaches his disciples to pray that indeed God’s name should be hallowed. Further, Lohse observes that whoever knows the name of another person and how to call him or her, obtains a contact to the person and can therefore request of him/her to fulfil one or another wish directed to him.³⁰⁵ In other words, knowledge of a person’s name corresponds to knowledge of the person which further grants relationship. Following from this, it is right to state that a person’s name represents the person and what he/she stands for. This point is supported when one considers two instances (among others) of name change in the OT. The first is in Gen 17:5, 15 – 16: God changes the name of Abram to Abraham to concretely convey what Abraham stands for (from God’s point of view): the father of many nations; and Sarai to Sarah, from whom nations and kings of people shall come. For Claus Westermann, even though the renaming of both persons marks a new phase of their life, it relates more to their function.³⁰⁶ The second instance pertains to Jacob in Gen 32:27– 28 whose name was changed to Israel, for he has striven with divine and human and prevailed.³⁰⁷ These two cases help to appreciate the significance of a name especially in relation to God. Already in the Decalogue, the Israelites are commanded not to abuse the name of God (Exod 20:7; Deut 5:11). Israel will, therefore, not mention the name of God in mundane affairs, for it is so holy as God himself is holy. They will rather refer to him by reformulating his name,³⁰⁸ in order not to hurt the holiness of it. God’s name was therefore held in fearful reverence. Still within the OT, one observes that it is God who declares God’s own name: in Genesis 17:1, he declares himself as the “Almighty God” before whom Abraham is required to walk blamelessly; in Exodus 3:14– 15, he declares his name to Moses as “I AM WHO I WILL BE (or AM).”³⁰⁹ He further declares his name in the Tetragrammaton

 See subsection 5.2.2 on the translation of the first petition of the LP in the Kusaal Bible.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 40. The original quote: “Wer den Namen eines anderen kennt und ihn zu nennen weiß, gewinnt Verbindung zu ihm und kann ihn um Erfüllung des einen oder anderen an ihn gerichteten Wunsches bitten.”  Claus Westermann, Genesis 12 – 36, vol. I, Biblischer Kommentar Altes Testament 2 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verl., 1981), 314, 322.  Westermann, I:631. argues that the renaming presupposes that Israel already exists, because the renaming takes place in a time when Jacob is already father to the twelve sons out of whom will later arise the twelve tribes of Israel.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 40.  ᾿Εγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν, in the LXX.

68

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

to Moses as LORD (YHWH)³¹⁰ by which he differentiates that from the “the God Almighty” which he declared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Exod 3:14; 6:3). In all this, one thing is clear: the name of God is the reality of God himself.³¹¹ Therefore, wherever the name of God is, there he is also present (Deut 12:11, 14:23).³¹² For instance, if the prophet (Isa 63:16c) referred to YHWH as “our Deliverer from of old,” it is the reality of God’s deliverance of Israel that is in view here. That notwithstanding, one also observes that having the privilege to know God’s name brings a corresponding duty to revere the name,³¹³ to hold it in fearful reverence as the third command of the Decalogue indicates, because God’s name can be abused, it can be profaned.³¹⁴ Take for instance, Ezek 36:16 – 23:³¹⁵ YHWH punishes Israel because they breached God’s commandments not to practise idolatry and murder. Then he accuses Israel for profaning his holy name in the Diaspora, “in that it was said of them, ‘These are the people of the LORD, yet they had to go out of his land’” (Ezek 36:20). How does YHWH seek to reclaim his holy name that has been profaned by Israel? Answer: “I will sanctify my great name, which has been profaned among the nations (…) and the nations shall know that I am the LORD, (…) when I display my holiness before their eyes” (Ezek 36:23).³¹⁶ How precisely? “I will take you [Israel] from the nations, (…) and bring you into your own land” (Ezek 36:24).³¹⁷ The point here is that God hallows God’s own name (cf. Ezek 39:7) through concrete salvific acts towards his people.³¹⁸ It also means that to hallow God’s name is to be obedient to God’s commands and to serve him.³¹⁹ Put differently, human beings can also be the subjects of hallowing God’s name (cf. Isa 29:23, etc.).³²⁰  In the LXX, Kyrios.  Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:127; See also: Hans Klein, Das Lukasevangelium, ed. Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer and Dietrich-Alex Koch, 10th ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 401.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 41.  Cf. Lohse, 41– 42.  See Lev 21:6, 22:2,32, etc, which require carefulness in order not to profane the name of God.  See also Lev 18:21, 20:3, Jer 34:16, Amos 2:7.  My emphasis.  My emphasis.  The theme of hallowing God’s name in Ezekiel has particularly influenced the interpretation of Lohfink, Das Vaterunser neu ausgelegt, 54– 59. who in explaining this petition argues that not only does Ezek 36 form a doubtless background to the first petition of the LP, but also against this background the petition should be understood as “(…) die endzeitliche Sammlung und Wiederherstellung des Gottesvolkes.” In other words, the eschatological gathering and reconstituting of the people of God.  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 42.  Cf. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:445 – 46.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

69

In the NT, the name of God finds full manifestation in all holiness and honour through the person of Jesus. Consequently, those baptised in the name of Jesus are made holy in their entire life;³²¹ meaning that through their lives too, the holiness of God is displayed, just as it simultaneously stands in danger of dishonour. Considering all this, the judgement one could reasonably come to in relation to the question posed at the beginning of this subsection is that, 1. God himself is the agent of the hallowing of his name³²² through his eschatological act of rescuing, regathering and reconstituting his people in and through Jesus, who, as Matthew presents him, will not only save his people from their sins (Matt 1:21) but be the one upon whose authority and teaching disciples should be made from the nations (the rest of the world) in the name of the Trinity (Matt 28:18 – 20). 2. The disciples who are invoking the Father have responsibility to through their lives manifest the holiness of God’s name.³²³ They are to be perfect as their heavenly Father is perfect (Matt 5:44– 45, 48). 3. And ultimately it is God who is at work in them to hallow God’s name. In other words, he holds the ability to keep his name hallowed, even if through human agents who are “earthen vessels.” In sum, one then considers along with Philonenko that God, the Father is in the first place the subject of the verb and then the disciples or praying believers.³²⁴ Whether the petition seeks the hallowing of God’s name now or in the future remains open. One helpful suggestion is that it pertains both now ³²⁵ and in the future (in the eschaton) when “God will be all in all” (1 Cor 15:24).³²⁶

 Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 43.  In which case God is the subject of the verb. Cf. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:446.  Meaning that the believer is the agent of the verb in the petition. Cf. Luz, 1:446. Luz considers that the ethical dimension cannot be excluded in the interpretation of the petition giving the parallels noted.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 45 – 46. Cf. Frey, ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’, 16. Draws attention to the fact that relevant Qumran witnesses indicate that human beings, i. e. the devoted community are subjects of hallowing God’s name.  This consideration is influenced by the aspect of the aorist form of the verb which among others also indicates the urgency of the action.  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 44; Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 50.

70

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

2.9.3 Second petition: May your kingdom come If the first petition sought earnestly that the name of the Father be hallowed by himself and by him through the praying disciples, then the second petition, logically, seeks that the kingdom of the Father should come. In other words, the second petition, just like in the Qaddish, is connected to the first: the “hallowing” of the Father’s name and his kingdom are bound together.³²⁷ Moreover, this petition brings out the kingly aspect of the Father epithet in Matthew’s Gospel (cf. Matt 5:34– 35) which recalls Florian Wilk’s conclusion above that the invocation of God as Father in the LP presents God, among others, as king. In the Qaddish, the demand for God’s kingdom to come in the now and indeed speedily follows, connectedly, from the desire for his “great name” to be hallowed. Comparing the two prayers, the second part of the Qaddish reads, “May His kingdom be established in your lifetime, speedily, soon (…).” The urgency of this petition is inescapable. The praying community sought God’s kingdom to prevail during their lifetime. In the LP, too, the urgency is there. Even if it is not explicitly expressed with “soon” and “speedily,” the aorist form of the verb testifies to this. However, the coming of God’s kingdom does not find clear and sharp expression in the Eighteen Benedictions as it does in the Qaddish and the Lord’s Prayer. The eleventh benediction which could stand as a parallel to our second petition reads: “Restore our judges, as in former times, and our counsellors as in the beginning, and reign over us—you alone. Blessed are you Lord, lover of justice.”³²⁸ One observes that the desire for only God to rule over Israel presupposes that the praying community does not in any way want to be ruled over by the current foreign rulers.³²⁹ This finds further expression in the fourteenth benediction which asks God to have compassion “upon the royal house of David, your righteously anointed one.” When this and the petition under discussion are held together, the following observation could be made: while the praying community in the Eighteen Benedictions seeks, not so intensely as in the Qaddish and in the LP, that God’s kingdom should come upon them, i. e. the nation of Israel, the petition in the LP has a cosmic perspective regarding the coming of God’s kingdom.³³⁰ This broader, beyond-Israel-dimension of God’s kingdom finds support in the epilogue of Mat-

 Possibly that is why the two petitions are not connected with a conjunction. See Lohse, Vater Unser, 45.  Emphasis mine.  See Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, 42.  Cf. Kuhn, 42. So that, as Paul (and his student) put it, “God will be all in all” (see 1 Cor 15:28, cf. Rom 11:36; Eph 4:6.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

71

thew’s Gospel where the risen Jesus charges his disciples to carry the kingdom mission further to all nations (Matt 28:18 – 20).³³¹ But what does “the kingdom of God” mean? Important to note here is that its meaning is largely determined by its Old Testament and Jewish provenance.³³² Within this context, the kingdom of God can also be expressed as the kingdom of heaven (which Matthew picks up) or heaven’s rule or God is king. In this case, it is, on the one hand, a verbal way of stating God’s holy name without mentioning it directly and, on the other hand, saying that “God is king” means referring to God’s kingdom.³³³ Moreover, the concept of the kingdom of God can be linked to the creation thought in which God is creator of the heavens and earth and everything in it (Ps 146:6).³³⁴ Besides, within the OT and Jewish understanding, the kingdom is over Israel—God is king and ruler over Israel (Isa 52:7; Ps 24:7– 10; 93:1– 2; 97:1)—but, its actual presence will be seen on “the Day” when the dominion of the heathens who now reign over Israel is overthrown.³³⁵ Beyond its Israelcentric character, the kingdom of God is also defined by its content and characteristics which the Psalms especially Ps 145 (considered as the summary of the theology of the Psalter) to Ps 150 express.³³⁶ It comes with justice and peace and inheritance of the earth (land) for the righteous but judgement and condemnation for the wicked.³³⁷ Against this background stands Jesus’s kingdom proclamation in which he gives a nuanced understanding to the “kingdom” or “rule” of God. At the heart of this proclamation was that the kingdom of heaven (ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν, going with Matthew) is at hand (Matt 4:17; 12:28; Mark 1:15; Luke 10:9; 11:20). In other words, the long-awaited kingdom of God, for which Jews have long prayed, was finally breaking in, but not in the manner that was expected (Luke 17:20)—through some apocalyptic event or strict obedience of the Law. As a dynamic reality as Christian Blumenthal designates it,³³⁸ the kingdom

 Compare Matt 1:18 – 25 and 28:18 – 20.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 45. See also Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 52– 54.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 46; Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 86 – 87.  Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 87.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 46. There was no consensus in Judaism on how this Day (the ‘messianic time’) was going to come: while the Pharisees held the view that through strict obedience to God’s Law, YHWH will fulfil his promise to Israel, the Zealots thought that through their aggressive confrontation of the heathen rule, that Day will dawn, possibly in an apocalyptic manner (See Lohse, 47.).  Bormann, Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 88.  Bormann, 91.  Christian Blumenthal, Basileia im Matthäusevangelium, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 416 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), 281.

72

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

was breaking in through his words (a call to repentance and turning to God) and deeds.³³⁹ The point of the kingdom breaking-in or being at hand is important because it also indicates the future aspect of it: what was expected in the future, at the last time (eschaton), has been inaugurated here and now (Luke 17:21b), yet its full expression will be found in the future which is within the Father’s authority (Acts 1:6 – 8). Noteworthy in the Matthean context is that, the kingdom is not just at hand (4:17), but it is also something that will be the possession of the poor (in spirit) and those persecuted for righteousness sake (5:3, 10: cf. Luke 6:20). In addition, people can enter into it (5:20; 7:21) and pray that it should come, which is the petition here, as well as seek it (6:33). Further, it is connected to casting out demons, i. e. exorcism (Matt 12:28). Ultimately, it is a dynamic phenomenon as the various parables in Matt 13 indicate. Who could enter the kingdom? Not a specific nation (like Israel) or ethnic group, but, according to Matthew, those “who do the will of the Father” ³⁴⁰ (ὁ ποιῶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πατρός, Matt 7:21; cf. 5:20). The understanding of the second petition, therefore, must be sought in the entire kingdom proclamation of Jesus.³⁴¹ For within it stands the cry to the Father for his kingdom to come. The prayer for the kingdom to come does not, however, exclude its dynamic presence. The question nonetheless is whose responsibility is it to bring the kingdom or rather for it to come. Logically, if it takes God (the Father) to hallow his name, then it must indubitably take him to bring his kingdom³⁴² in the manner that he sees fit, and, as the Gospels bear witness, certainly through Jesus, the Christ. Further, if Bovon rightly observes that the kingdom is not yet [fully] present in its power and visibility and therefore becomes the object of expectation (Acts 1:6 – 8), hope (Luke 21:31) and prayer³⁴³ (as in the LP), then one can also consider this prayer on eschatological grounds: that the petition looks out to the future final manifestation of the kingdom of God in all its glory when “the kingdom of this world” will become “the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ” (Rev 11:15). That does not, however, rule out the implication of the kingdom for the present time. Certainly, the kingdom that has broken-in has initial evidence in the salvation of many, the healing of many, the feeding of many, the deliverance of many from demonic oppression.

 Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 46 – 47.  Here one notices how τὸ θέλημα (“will”) is connected to ἡ βασιλεία (“kingdom”).  Cf. Kuhn, Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim, 42– 43; Klein, Das Lukasevangelium, 404 ff.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 50.  Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:127.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

73

Therefore, to pray³⁴⁴ that God’s kingdom (i. e. his rule and dominion) should come, is not only to anticipate its future full and visible manifestation, but it is also to seek that God will cause his inaugurated rule in Jesus’s life and the life of his disciples after him to continue to have evidence in saving,³⁴⁵ healing, delivering and feeding in the here and now.³⁴⁶ This is the will of God and that provides the connection to the third petition below.

2.9.4 Third petition: Your will be done, as in heaven also on earth If the first petition sought the hallowing of the Father’s name and the second, the coming of his kingdom, the third petition, which concludes the You-Petitions, seeks that his will be done also on earth as it already is in heaven.³⁴⁷ It has been stated shortly those who will enter the kingdom are not those who call Jesus Lord, Lord, but those who do the will of his Father (Matt 7:21). From this, one can draw the conclusion that the kingdom of the Father and the will of the Father go hand in hand. The mention of the will also recalls the first petition of the Qaddish: “(…) the world which He created according to His will.”³⁴⁸ Here, just as in other Jewish prayers, the will of God is the basis for creation. Indeed, prayers for God’s will to be done, be it by God himself or by him through human agents, were common in both the OT and later Judaism.³⁴⁹ For instance, just as 1 Macc 3:60 acknowledges, “But as his will in heaven may be, so shall he do,” so also Rabbi Eliezer prays, “As in heaven, so also on earth.”³⁵⁰ In relation to this context, it is important to state that obeying the com-

 For it takes God to bring God’s kingdom, therefore, the necessity to pray to him.  For the coming of the Kingdom requires repentance (Matt 4:17; Mark 1:15) which leads to salvation.  Clearly, this view combines both the Greek and the Latin exegetical traditions; just like the Western exegetes and the Reformers did. See Luz Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:447. for further explanation on this. Martin Luther wrote: “Es komm dein Reich zu dieser Zeit und dort hernach in Ewigkeit” (quoted in Luz, 448).  Indeed, one can argue here that the point of this petition, in other words, is that all the two preceding petitions should be done according to his will, and therefore provides a conclusion to the first part. See Lohse, Vater Unser, 55..  Emphasis mine.  For significant Jewish parallels to this petition see Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 69 – 76.  Quotation in Gottlob Schrenk, ‘Θέλημα’, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1965), 54.

74

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

mandments or following the Torah was integral part of doing God’s will³⁵¹ (and certainly that leads to hallowing his name as indicated in the first petition). In the NT, God’s will, however, finds a deeper sense in Jesus’s life and work. He is presented as the one in whom the will of the Father found full revelation. Consequently, his entire life is squarely rooted and lived in this divine will.³⁵² The quintessential proof of it is the Gethsemane travail: “(…) my Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done (Matt 26:42).³⁵³ If Matthew associates the “will” to the Father (Matt 6:10; 7:21; 12:50; 18:14), John links it to the “divine Sender” (John 4:34; 5:30).³⁵⁴ The “Sent” (i. e. Jesus, in Johannine language) therefore has “come down not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me” (John 6:38), by doing and completing the work of the divine Sender (τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός, John 4:34).³⁵⁵ It is important to note here that for Matthew doing the Father’s will is central to his ethics and it is not surprising that it forms part of the things one should learn to pray for. Furthermore, it is relevant recalling here that within the context of the Sermon on the Mount, the will of God is revealed or rather is to be found in the authoritative interpretation of the Law by Jesus. What then is the content³⁵⁶ of this will? For Matthew, the content of the will is certainly found in the teachings of Jesus, the main section of which is the Sermon on the Mount. Returning to the petition, the question that also needs to be asked is who the subject of the imperative γενηθήτω is. Within the context of the three petitions, if it has been argued that it ultimately takes God (working through the believers) to hallow his name and to bring his kingdom, then the same logic applies here too, namely that it takes God to eventually do God’s will. And the praying believers participate as active agents in executing the divine will (i. e. being subjects themselves of the imperative) when the divine subject is working through them. From all this, the observation is made that the one who prays that God’s will be done, must be ready to submit his/her own will and be obedient to the Father as well as live his/her entire life with this attitude.³⁵⁷ For it is—to borrow the language of

 See Lohse, Vater Unser, 56.  Cf. Schrenk, TDNT 3:55.  πάτερ μου, εἰ οὐ δύναται τοῦτο παρελθεῖν ἐὰν μὴ αὐτὸ πίω, γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου.  Schrenk, TDNT 3:55.  Cf. Schrenk, TDNT 3:55.  Schrenk observes that the definition of the content of the will of God is rare because it is taken as obvious. He notes, however, the few cases of specification of the divine will as John 6:39 [‐40]; 1 Thess 4.3; 5:18; [2 Cor 8:5].  Schrenk, TDNT 3:55; cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 56.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

75

the Hebrew writer—about looking on to Jesus who is the originator and perfecter of our faith.³⁵⁸ This gives an ethical³⁵⁹ dimension to the petition (and that certainly falls within Matthean ethics³⁶⁰ as well) as much as it looks forward to the last day when the divine will that was fully revealed in Jesus will find complete expression. In other words, praying that his will be done implies that the praying believers are willing to live their entire life here on earth in total obedience and in submission of their own will to the Father³⁶¹ while they wait in patient endurance for the full manifestation of that divine will on the last day. In short, the petition holds implications for the now even if it has an eschatological dimension. The point of the second part of the petition, “as in heaven, also on earth,” indicates this orientation: his will is already established in heaven but the desire in prayer now is that that reality will prevail on earth too.³⁶² Looking at the three petitions together, as already stated in the semantic analysis, one gets the sense that their actual implication has rather the entire creation in view than the last set of petitions, the first of which is the bread petition.

2.9.5 Fourth petition: Our bread for the coming day give us today The syntax underlying this petition calls for a serious attention to its content.³⁶³ Accordingly, its elucidation here will proceed by holding side by side the words “bread” and “give.” The idea that God gives bread is not new to the NT; it has expression already in the OT. But what does “bread” really mean? In Gen 3:19, Adam is told, “by the sweat of your face you shall eat bread (…)” because “cursed is the land because of you” (Gen 3:17b).³⁶⁴ Here, bread stands generically for food and nourishment for human sustenance or livelihood. Indeed, Ernst Lohmeyer observes that, “In the narrative writings [of the OT], ‘to give bread to someone’ merely means to give him something to eat, to look after him, to feed him.”³⁶⁵ But bread in ancient

       

See Heb 12:2. Cf. 1 Pet 2:15. See, Boring, An Introduction to the New Testament, 542– 43. For that is the content of Christian living (Cf. Schrenk, TDNT 3:58). See Blumenthal, Basileia im Matthäusevangelium, 91– 106. See subsection 1.3.3 for syntactic analysis on the text. Emphasis mine. Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 136.

76

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

Israel also had the specific meaning of the type of food or dish that was served at table. This was made from wheat or barley and was certainly a staple in ancient Israel.³⁶⁶ It was food that could be carried for a long journey or that could be eaten hurriedly as the Exodus narrative indicates (Exod 12:8 – 11). From the Exodus narrative, bread also assumed cultic significance in Israel (Lev 24:5 – 9, 12). In extending further the initially stated point that the idea of divine provision of bread to Israel is well-established in the OT. A classic example for that is the manna story in Exodus 16, which was noted in the word analysis on ἐπιούσιος above. It narrates God’s raining down bread from heaven for Israel in the wilderness. The bread here catered for the daily food needs of the Israelites even if they later complained and asked for meat. Possibly with the idea of divine provision in mind, the Psalmist (Ps 136:25) appeals that thanksgiving be rendered to God because he “gives food to all flesh (…).” For Philonenko, the bread in this petition is no other than the manna in Exod 16.³⁶⁷ Moreover, Agur in Proverbs 30:8 demands of God, inter alia, that he be given only the food that he needs so that he will not be too full and deny God or be poor and steal and profane the name of God. In addition, Jacob on his flight from home to his uncle Laban, vows, “If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and clothing to wear,” he will be his God, etc. (Gen 28:20 – 22). Furthermore, the Psalmist confesses, “The eyes of all look to you, and you give them their food in due season” (Ps 145:15). Thus, God indeed gives bread, be it in the collective sense of food and nourishment or specific sense of dish, to his people. Also, “Old Testament faith (…) regards [a person’s] possessions and (…) heritage,” Lohmeyer asserts, “as a gift and a loan from God (…).”³⁶⁸ This gift of possession certainly includes bread that feeds the individual.³⁶⁹ Accordingly, at meals in a Jewish setting, the father who sits at the head of the table takes up the bread and after praying, breaks and passes it around.³⁷⁰ One of such prayers runs like this, Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the universe, who feedest the whole world with thy goodness, with grace, with loving kindness and tender mercy: thou givest food to all flesh (…). Through thy great goodness food hath never failed us: O may it not fail us for

 Horst Balz, ‘Ἄρτος’, in Exegetisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament, ed. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2011), 384.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 84– 85.  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 137.  Cf. Lohmeyer, 137.  Cf. Balz, EWNT 3:384.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

77

ever and ever for thy great name’s sake, since thou (…) providest food for all thy creatures whom thou have created.³⁷¹

A similarly connected prayer, the ninth benediction of the Eighteen Benedictions, asks that God “bless (…) this year to our benefit, with all kinds of produce, give dew and rain, upon the ground, and satisfy the world, from the storehouses of your goodness, and give a blessing, on the work of our hands.” In other words, God provides this bread by making the land fruitful through rain and dew and by blessing the occupation of his people from which they eke out a living or say find their bread. All this attests to the stated idea that God provides bread to Israel and that the OT and Judaism considered “bread” (i. e. food) as God’s gracious gift to his creation. Undoubtedly, however, having bread in the OT also brought the attendant responsibility of sharing it with the poor as Isaiah 58:7 implies. In addition, Jan Milič Lochman posits that God and bread as well as human and bread stand in dialectic relationship such that God gives bread and it is the part of human, in receiving the bread, to offer thanks to God; acknowledging that it is indeed a gift,³⁷² hence explaining the numerous graces or meal prayers in biblical faith some of which have been quoted above. Returning to the NT, bread (ὁ ἄρτος) has three connected layers of meaning.³⁷³ 1. The first meaning refers to bread in the specific sense, a staple made from wheat or barley as earlier noted. This is what comes in the numerous meal stories recorded in the Gospels, be it in the feeding of the five thousand (Matt 14:13 – 21//Mark 6:32– 44; Luke 9:10b – 17) and later four thousand people (Matt 15:32– 39//Mark 8:1– 10) by Jesus or in the Last Supper story (Matt 26:26 – 29//Mark 14:22– 25), or in Paul’s exhortation of his companions in the perilous journey to Rome to eat bread (Acts 27:35). 2. In contrast, the second meaning is broader: it widely depicts nourishment. According to Lochman, “Paul has this [i. e. nourishment] in view when he tells the Thessalonians to work quietly and eat their own bread (i. e. earn their own living, 2 Thess 3:12).”³⁷⁴

 Quoted in: Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 137.  Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 100.  See Johannes Behm, ‘Ἄρτος’, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1964), 477– 78; cf. Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 89.  Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 90.

78

3.

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

The third meaning of ὁ ἄρτος in the NT is more symbolic than literal. “Bread symbolizes the heavenly, eschatological banquet,” asserts Lochman.³⁷⁵ In this sense stands the symbolism of the Last Supper and Jesus’s self-understanding in John’s Gospel as “(…) the living bread that came down from heaven” (John 6:51).³⁷⁶

These three meanings largely account for the about ninety-seven (97)³⁷⁷ appearances of ὁ ἄρτος in the NT (majority of it being in the Gospels).³⁷⁸ Returning to the stated idea of God giving bread or providing for his creation, for Matthew, even the birds of the air and the flowers of the valley are cared for by God (Matt 6:26 – 30). God³⁷⁹ (through Jesus) feeds the five thousand and the four thousand with five and seven loaves of bread respectively (Matt 14:16 – 21; 15:32– 39). Considering the bread petition in light of the above, it is hard to overlook the biblical truth of God meeting the food needs of the disciples. Notably, this is in congruous with the invocation of God as Father. It was noted that his Fatherhood consists inter alia in his gracious, caring attention to the believers and his entire creation. That caring attention includes providing for the food needs of those who turn to him as their Father (6:26 – 30). Consequently, the petition is to be considered (without contradicting the imperative in Matt 6:34 on not worrying about tomorrow which is precisely baseless because worrying does not change anything) as appealing to the loving and caring Father “today” for the food that is needed for the everyday subsistence of the disciples,³⁸⁰ or say, their survival in “the coming day.” By this, the explication here inclines to both the first  Lochman, 90.  Lochman, 90.  See Morgenthaler, Statistik des neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes, 79.  These three references of bread together with the adjective ἐπιούσιος could also have influenced the varying interpretations of this petition in the past from literal sense to the spiritual sense.  Matthew’s presentation of Jesus as Ἐμμανουήλ (Emmanuel, “God with us”) in 1:23 supports the view that he sees in Jesus the return of YHWH. Therefore, he in a passivum divinum does the feeding of the crowd.  Michael Wolter, ‘Das Gebet Der Jünger: Das Vaterunser Im Lukasevangelium (Lk 11,2c – 4)’, in Das Vaterunser in Seinen Antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, ed. Florian Wilk, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 266 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 134– 36., tries to understand the word by discussing it in relation to the existential conditions of the disciples vis-à-vis their commission by their Master Jesus to preach the Gospel from one place to the other and to receive their bread in the course of this mission through those who will host them. By this approach, his conclusion of “bread for the next day” (see esp. p. 136) eventually falls under the interpretation being followed in this work.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

79

and second meanings of bread in the NT outlined above and the first derivation of ἐπιούσιος presented earlier.³⁸¹ The point of praying “today” for “the coming day’s” bread, whatever today and the coming day mean, is no sign of worry, but an expression of confident faith in the Father who cares and indeed provides for his children. Whether this coming day means tomorrow from today, or the next day from this morning (i. e. in the ancient estimation of time where the next day started in the evening) or even the future, the sense of the immediacy³⁸² is inescapable. Hence, a positive consideration is given here to Colins Hemer’s postulation (in his exposition of ἐπιούσιος) that the accent “is upon the immediate sequence rather than on the chronological date.”³⁸³ Probably, this sense is better expressed by Luke’s version with its present predicate and its τὸ καθ’ ἡμέραν. In brief, the view held here (having first century socio-economic context³⁸⁴ in mind) is that the petition in erster Linie addresses the material food needs of the praying disciples. For the Master who teaches his disciples to pray to the Father in this manner, in the feeding of the four thousand people also indicated, “I have compassion for the crowd, because they have been with me now for three days and have nothing to eat; and I do not want to send them away hungry, for they might faint on the way” (Matt 15:32). If the petition is situated this way in the ministry of Jesus, then an eschatological dimension of the bread being asked for could be further considered. For Matthew (and his colleague Evangelists) present(s) Jesus as one through whose words and deeds the kingdom of heaven was demonstrably breaking-in, even if this also meant that those who were arrested and transformed by its effects now have to live in expectant hope of its final consummation. In other words, if the petition is placed in the kingdom proclamation mission of Jesus and if Lohmeyer is right in positing that, “bread is the image and reality of the eschatological kingdom of God,”³⁸⁵ then one may be right in arguing that what comes from the heavenly Father must be able to still the hunger of his children here and now, just as, by so doing, it will also simultaneously be pre-empting the day—

 See Subsection 2.8.2.  Cf. Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 63.  Hemer, ‘Έπιούσιος’, 90.  According to Wenham, ‘The Sevenfold Form of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew’s Gospel’, 382., considering first the century socio-economic context, food would have “been the top concern for [many] people.”  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 153.

80

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

in eschatological terms—when, “They will hunger no more, and thirst no more, (…) for the Lamb (…) will be their shepherd (…)” (Rev 7:16 – 17).³⁸⁶ If “Our bread for the coming day give us today” implies the plea for what will still the daily hunger of the praying community, then an important following need of the day is right standing with the Father and with fellow humans which leads to the fifth petition.

2.9.6 Fifth petition: And forgive us our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors The petition consists of two parts, namely a protasis and an apodosis. The protasis seeks for the Father’s forgiveness and the apodosis (as far as the Matthean context is concerned) recognises the need to have granted forgiveness to one’s neighbours.³⁸⁷ The discussion of the petition will thus follow this divide between protasis and apodosis. First, the protasis: the understanding of the entire petition lies undoubtedly in the predicate, “forgive” and the accusative plural, “debts.” From its classical Greek usage, the verb—ἀφίεναι—translated here “forgive” had among others the juristic meaning, to release one from the legal obligations of say office, marriage, debt, punishment, etc.³⁸⁸ It hardly had religious connotations in classical Greek like it is found in the LXX and later in the NT.³⁸⁹ Indeed, Rudolf Bultmann observes that the LXX usages, some of which mean “to remit” or “to forgive,” conceives, in this sense, the relationship between humans and God in juristic terms which is completely alien to Greek thought.³⁹⁰ In the NT (and also in the LXX) the

 Cf. Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 134– 59; and Bovon, Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:131 who considers that both understandings could hold together. In contrast, Philonenko argues that the bread in this petition has an eschatological character. He holds this view because he interprets the petition in light of the manna story in Exod 16 and argues that the bread being prayed for is for the great Sabbath day that will end all history. Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 86.  Cf. Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 64.  Rudolf Bultmann, ‘᾿Aφίημι, Ἄφεσις, Παρίημι, Πάρεσις’, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1964), 509 – 10; See also: Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 163.  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 163; Bultmann, TDNT 1:509 – 10.  Bultmann, TDNT 1:510.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

81

verb has, among others, “sins” and “trespasses” as its objects, implying to forgive or remit the said sins or trespasses.³⁹¹ If the predicate is taken from the juristic circles, then its object—τὰ οφειλήματα—in this petition is taken from commerce or finance. For the word, granted its Aramaic original form, could mean debt in financial terms.³⁹² Philonenko and Schattner-Rieser have, however, noted that the word in its Aramaic original could mean both debt and sin.³⁹³ Interestingly, this substantive occurs only twice in the NT: here in Matthew and in Paul’s letter to the Romans (4:4). Between these two usages, it is the Matthean usage in the LP that gives it a religious dimension.³⁹⁴ For Lohse, the word presupposes that the debtor has previously received something that he/she must now return or pay back.³⁹⁵ In connection with the verb ἀφίεναι then, the sense rightly implied is the remittance of that debt which probably the debtor could not pay. The connection of both words to each other, according to Lohmeyer, is not uncommon in Greek linguistic usage. He also observes that this idea of remittance from or letting go of debts is captured in the LXX translation of the OT Sabbath Year (every seven years) in which God commanded that debtors be set free from their debts (Deut 15:2).³⁹⁶ The foregoing puts the concepts of “debts” and “forgiveness” in a social context, but the petition appeals to God for the forgiveness of debts. Indeed, the idea of God’s forgiveness of sins or say debts already exists in the OT³⁹⁷ and Judaism in the context of God’s relationship with his elect people, Israel. In this context, whatever that disrupts³⁹⁸ this relationship becomes the sin or debt that needs to be remitted. The one who lets go so that the relationship can be restored is God and the object of this forgiveness is undoubtedly the sin or debt³⁹⁹ that Israel  Bultmann, TDNT 1:511.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 69.  Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 88; Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 127.  Cf. Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 162 f.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 70.  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 163, cf. Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 90 – 91. The remittance or say setting free from the legally mandated obligation could also underlie the verb’s usage in 1 Cor 7:11– 13.  The complex difference between the language of sacrifice and atonement in cultic theology and the language of God’s forgiveness in the OT is well elucidated in Feldmeier and Spieckermann, God of the Living, 309 – 19. For both authors, the difference, however, has the common aim that both concepts of sacrifice and atonement and forgiveness seek to remove guilt and enable life, p.315.  For instance, Isaiah 59:2 declares, “Rather, your iniquities have been barriers between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear.”  Lohse, Vater Unser, 70; Bultmann, TDNT 1:510.

82

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

could not pay.⁴⁰⁰ The self-revelation of God to Moses already presents God as one who forgives sins, iniquity and transgression (Exod 34:6 – 7), so that Moses quickly seizes upon this revelation and appeals to God to journey further with his people by forgiving them their iniquity and sin (Exod 34:9).⁴⁰¹ Moreover, the Psalter is not oblivious of divine forgiveness of sins. For instance, while Ps 130:3 – 4 acknowledges God’s forgiveness rather than his recording of sins, Ps 51 appeals earnestly for the reality of this act of God to be experienced in the petitioner’s life. That aside, the revered yearly Day of Atonement on which the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies to atone for the sins of Israel is also predicated on this idea under consideration: that God forgives sin.⁴⁰² The prophetic writings are not short of instances where the prophets of Israel call on Israel to turn back to God so that their sins will be forgiven,⁴⁰³ neither are they oblivious of the concept of God’s forgiveness.⁴⁰⁴ The sixth benediction of the Eighteen Benedictions knows of God’s forgiveness too, for it petitions, “Forgive us our Father, for we have sinned against you. Blot out and remove our transgressions, from before your eyes, for your compassion is great. Blessed are you Lord, who abundantly forgives.” This does not only offer a significant parallel to the petition currently being discussing, but it is also telling of how central God’s forgiveness was in Jewish faith and praxis. One thing is thus certain about God’s forgiveness as attested in the OT and ancient Judaism: this forgiveness is appropriated by the debtor’s or sinner’s demonstration of remorse and readiness to repent by turning completely back to God in right relationship prior to the sin.⁴⁰⁵ For in Tobith 13:6b, the call is, “Turn back, you sinners and do what is right before him; perhaps he may look with favour upon you and show you mercy.” When attention is turned to the NT, it is obvious that the two concepts—forgiveness and debts/sins—find a similar but somewhat nuanced expression. Unlike in the OT and Judaism, the new nuance to forgiveness in the NT is that “the saving act which has taken place in Jesus Christ” becomes the basis for receiving

 It is precisely because they cannot pay the debt or cleanse themselves from the sin they have gotten themselves into that they require God’s forgiveness. Lochman (already cited) just as Lohmeyer (already cited) underscores that in relation to God, humans owe nothing to Him but themselves. This reality then explains why they cannot pay their debts and therefore require God to remit or say let go of these debts.  In the LXX the ἀφίεναι has τὰς ἁμαρτίας and τὰς ἀνομίας as its objects.  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 70.  See Isa 1:18; 38:17; 40:2; 43:25, etc.  See Isa 64:9; Jer 31:34; Dan 9:9  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 70.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

83

this forgiveness.⁴⁰⁶ In other words, there is a Christological dimension to God’s forgiveness of sins in the NT which is foretold in the OT through the election of Israel.⁴⁰⁷ For instance, Matt 1:21 already conceives programmatically the mission of Jesus as one which will save his people from sins, just as he truly demonstrates albeit in a passivum divinum in Matt 9:2– 8. Indeed, the shedding of his blood in Eucharistic terms is the means to the remission of the sins of many (Matt 26:28). From now, it will be in his name that the post-Easter church will preach the forgiveness of sins and exhort people to turn in repentance and be baptised in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:38). In Paul’s understanding, sin, which he speaks of in its singular form, is the power that enslaves its victims and it is only Jesus who has the power to set these slaves free from the dominating capture of sin (Rom 5:12– 21),⁴⁰⁸ because in the Blessed Exchange (beatum commercium) he took our sins upon himself. But how does one access the reality of this forgiveness? Bultmann is of the view that it is by acknowledging God’s judgement on humanity as sinful through confession of sins⁴⁰⁹ (1 John 1:8 – 10). If the forgiveness of sins is mediated through Jesus (Matt 26:28), then one is right to think that this petition requests God’s remission of debts (i. e. sins) which he was eschatologically executing in and through the ministry of Jesus.⁴¹⁰ Therefore, this forgiveness, as much as the petition could be and would be repeated daily, covers the entire life of the believers. That notwithstanding, their prayer for remission of sins also requires their prior forgiveness of others⁴¹¹ which leads to the apodosis—ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν (“as we also have forgiven our debtors”). As already indicated under the textual criticism, Jeremias thinks of the aorist predicate in the apodosis as going back to an Aramaic perfectum praesens which will then translate the apodosis as, “as we herewith forgive our debtors.”⁴¹² Following from this, the difficulty that this petition could have presented, namely that human forgiveness of others becomes the basis to demand God’s forgiveness, is excluded. Moreover, the Matthean context permits the assumption that the point here is not using one’s forgiveness of others as a basis to request for-

 Bultmann, TDNT 1:511.  The Christological mediation of forgiveness is already foretold in for e. g. Isaiah 53.  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 71.  TDNT 1:512; See also: Lohse, Vater Unser, 71.  Cf. Bultmann, TDNT 1:511– 12; Lohse, Vater Unser, 70 – 71.  Lochman pointedly declares, “Beyond question, forgiveness is not a one-dimensional matter, a one-way street” (The Lord’s Prayer, 120).  Jeremias, ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’, 146; see also: Lohse, Vater Unser, 72– 72.

84

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

giveness from God, but that seeking forgiveness from God requires that one first of all forgives others too. ⁴¹³ Accordingly, for Peter von der Osten-Sacken, the phrase “as we also” (in Matthew) indicates an assertion with the sense: “we confess that we have forgiven those who got indebted to us, and so we enter before you and request for your forgiveness.”⁴¹⁴ Even if he thinks otherwise, von der Osten-Sacken’s interpretation does not preclude Lohse’s understanding that the apodosis also indicates the readiness to forgive others or share the divine forgiveness with others⁴¹⁵ because the Matthean context also permits the thinking that receiving divine forgiveness comes with the expectation that one will share such forgiveness with others. This underlies the parable of the unmerciful servant in Matt 18:23 – 35 as will be shown shortly. Probably with this in mind, Lohmeyer argues, “our ‘human forgiveness’ can and must be understood simply as a reflection of the divine forgiveness.”⁴¹⁶ That those who pray to God for forgiveness should also forgive others is equally, however, not novel to the NT, for it has appearance in Jewish literature: “Forgive your neighbour the wrong he has done, and then your sins will be pardoned when you pray,” exhorts Sir 28:2. Rabbinic tradition takes this further. For example, Rabbi Judah said in the name of Rabbi Gamaliel (about 90 A.D.): ‘Behold it is said, “He shows you mercy (towards others) so that he can have mercy upon you” (Deut. 13.18). Let that be a sign in your hand: as often as you are merciful, the All-Merciful will have mercy upon you’. Or ‘He who is merciful to others, mercy is shown to him by heaven.’⁴¹⁷

Nonetheless, this idea has a sharper expression in the NT. To lay emphasis on this petition of the LP, Matthew repeats the theme of forgiveness in 6:14– 15 by insisting, “For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if you don’t forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.” He expresses a similar idea in Matt 5:23 – 24; 18:15 – 22. The idea

 Cf. Peter von der Osten-Sacken, ‘Das Vaterunser als Zugang zum Matthäusevangelium: Das Beispiel der Vergebungsbitte’, in Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, ed. Florian Wilk, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 266 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 107; Feldmeier, ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’, 64.,  von der Osten-Sacken, ‘Das Vaterunser als Zugang zum Matthäusevangelium: Das Beispiel der Vergebungsbitte’, 107.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 73. His understanding is certainly influenced by his teacher J. Jeremias whose interpretation von der Osten-Sacken actually reacts to in his article cited above.  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 182.  Lohmeyer, 167.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

85

receives a dramatic and vivid expression in the parable of the unmerciful servant whose “big debts” are cancelled by his lord but who refuses to cancel the “little debts” of his co-servant (Matt 18:23 – 35). The implication is that the lord of the unmerciful servant⁴¹⁸ expected him to have extended the forgiveness he received to his fellow servant. With this parable, the Matthean Jesus comes back to the theme of forgiveness expressed in this petition by disclosing, “So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother [and sister] from your heart” (Matt 18:35).⁴¹⁹ Mark who does not seem to show knowledge of the entire text, however, has a parallel to this petition in Mark 11:25: “Whenever you stand praying forgive, if you have anything against anyone; so that your Father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses.” Considering the foregoing, the fifth petition can be said to recapture an important OT and Jewish theme of forgiveness by giving it Christological nuance in Jesus through whose teaching God is presented as “our Father” to the disciples. The petition thus seeks the gracious forgiveness of debts (in religious sense) which the Father was eschatologically making available once and for all in the Son. At the same time, it acknowledges the corresponding duty on the praying persons to have forgiven others and even, as the situation may demand (like that of the unmerciful servant), readiness to share the divine forgiveness with others.⁴²⁰ If the fourth petition sought what will keep the body functioning, this fifth petition seeks what will maintain the relationship between the Father and the believers and between believers and others. Indeed, this petition undoubtedly touches a central chord of the Christian Gospel; it is a Cross-shaped petition. Provision for the body and right relationship with God and neighbour only meet part of the important needs of the praying persons: they will require security too and that leads to the last two-fold petition.

 His lord designates him as δοῦλε πονηρέ (“evil servant”).  Translation mine.  This gives the petition an ethical dimension, because the faithful are required, by their daily need of divine forgiveness, to forgive others no matter how many times they are offended (see Matt 18:21– 22). In this regard, Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 183 points out that human forgiveness is the “effect of the forgiveness which we have experienced from God.”

86

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

2.9.7 Sixth petition: And bring us not into temptation, but rescue us from the evil one As earlier indicated, this petition is taken as a parallelimus membrorum and therefore are considered as one but two-fold petition.⁴²¹ The parallelimus membrorum offers an initial negative expression which is the first part of the petition and a subsequent corresponding positive formulation, that is the second part. Explications of the petition here will therefore follow this negative-positive axis. The negative formulation. It does not have variants in the manuscript tradi⁴²² tion and it is the only negative formulation in the entire text.⁴²³ The explication of its meaning, however, requires holding together the prohibitive subjunctive,⁴²⁴ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς and πειρασμόν. Lohmeyer observes that the verb, “always refers to movement from one place to another in the New Testament.”⁴²⁵ Commenting later after Lohmeyer on this verb, Lohse equally draws attention to its spatial meaning.⁴²⁶ Coming from this meaning, then, the sense created is: God not leading or bringing the suppliants into the sphere of temptation. This is where this part of the petition poses exegetical and theological difficulties⁴²⁷ as evidenced in its exegetical history. For the literal sense could create the impression that God can bring his people into temptation.⁴²⁸ Indeed, as already discussed under the word analysis on πειρασμός, such impression is not meant here. In the analysis, it was noted that πειρασμός in this petition implies the negative sense, namely the temptation—no doubt from the devil—that seduces God’s people away from the divine appointed path and not the positive sense where God puts the obedience and faithfulness of his children to test. If that is the case—that the verb does not implicate God as the one leading his children to evil and that the πειρασμός here is not the one that comes from God—what

 Cf. Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 102.  See Section 2.3 on textual criticism above. Cf. Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 191.  See Jeremias, Abba, 169.  According to Lohmeyer, “the prohibitive subjunctive often takes the place of the aorist imperative in the koine and particularly in the New Testament. There is no difference of meaning between the two forms; the imperative is not (…) more strict and the subjunctive more gentle. (…) [it] express[es] a categorical prohibition” (Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 191).  Lohmeyer, 194.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 76. “Dem Verbum (…) kommt räumliche Bedeutung zu (…).” See also Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 145.  See Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 191– 93 for details on the questions that this petition raised for the early Church.  Jeremias, Abba, 169.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

87

then does the combined sense of both words mean for understanding this petition? It will be instructive to answer this question in relation to Jewish parallels as has been done with the other petitions. To this end, a quote of an old Jewish evening prayer will be helpful here: “Leite meinen Fuß nicht in die Gewalt der Sünde, und bring mich nicht in die Gewalt der Schuld, und nicht in die Gewalt der Versuchung, und nicht in die Gewalt von Schändlichem.”⁴²⁹ Comparing the desire of this prayer to the desire held out in the petition under consideration, one can hardly miss the point that, just as a Jew praying this prayer seeks that God will not permit him to come into the power of sin, iniquity, temptation and contempt, so also the believers praying this part of the sixth petition implore the Father to preserve them from temptation which could lead them away from him.⁴³⁰ In other words, one will agree with Jeremias in positing that the imperative (or rather the subjunctive) here has a “permissive” nuance to it.⁴³¹ This way of understanding the petition is not new to Jeremias⁴³² (and the likes), for already in the early ages of the church, attempts were made to reformulate the petition to avoid the impression already stated: that God tempts his people. For instance, Marcion is said to have rewritten the Lucan version of this petition (Luke 11:4) as, “Laß nicht zu, dass wir in Versuchung geraten.”⁴³³ In other words, “Permit not that we come into temptation.” In addition, Jerome on his part captures the supposed intent of the petition as, “Führe uns nicht in eine Versuchung, die wir nicht zu tragen vermögen.”⁴³⁴ That is, “Lead us not into a temptation that we cannot bear.” These reformulations only underline, on the one hand, the exegetical and theological difficulty that this petition presents and, on the other hand, betrays the attempt “to protect God, the Father in heaven, against active participation in the menacing event of temptation.”⁴³⁵ What precisely, then, is this temptation that Jesus teaches his disciples to pray that the Father should not lead them into? Is it the eschatological, final

 Jeremias, 169.  Cf. Jeremias, 169 – 70; Lohse, Vater Unser, 77– 82. Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 194. will however point to the difference between the two noting that while the Jewish prayer seeks that God should not give the petitioner over to the power of sin, iniquity, temptation and contempt, the petition under discussion seeks that “God will keep the suppliant from any temptation.”  Jeremias, Abba, 169.  He accordingly translates the petition as, “Laß uns nicht der Versuchung anheimfallen.” In other words, “Let us not fall victim to temptation.” Jeremias, 169.  Quoted in: Lohse, Vater Unser, 77.  Quoted in: Lohse, 77.  Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 144.

88

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

hour of trial that will befall all the inhabitants of the earth (Rev 3:10) in a magnitude that has not been since creation and never will be (Mark 13:19)? Or the manifestations of this last trial in the here-and-now daily lives of the disciples? In relation to the first question, Luz⁴³⁶ as well as Hans Klein⁴³⁷ in their respective commentaries on the text reject any eschatological interpretation of πειρασμός in this petition favoured by Jeremias and others.⁴³⁸ For Luz, almost everything speaks against such an interpretation: neither in Jewish apocalyptic writings nor in the New Testament (except Rev 3:10) is πειρασμός used in the eschatological sense. Moreover, he argues that the absence of the expected definite article speaks against this interpretation and the Jewish parallels (one of which has been quoted above) rather speak for daily life danger(s). For him, therefore, the power of God is in view here.⁴³⁹ There are thus two views here that need to be considered: the eschatological view and the non-eschatological view. In my view, the two do not exclude each other. Certainly, if πειρασμός in this petition has the sense of temptation that “seduc[es] men from the course which God has appointed for them, and (…) lead[s] them along a way which he forbids”⁴⁴⁰ and the verb has a permissive nuance, then, given the anarthrous nature of πειρασμόν, the eschatological day of trial is immediately not in view here, but rather the daily life dangers that confront the disciples in respect of holding out their faith in the here-and-now. At the same time, it is not far-fetching to think that these daily life dangers in relation to the disciples are also this-worldly manifestations of the eschatological day of trial in the lives of the disciples, hence a combination of both views with the eschatological interpretation only being implied by extension. Consequently, the point of this petition is that the gracious Father is being asked to keep his children through their prayers (Matt 26:41) from every ⁴⁴¹ temptation of this life (and indeed from the very final one) that could lead them to denial and apostasy.⁴⁴² It is not hard to understand why the Master is reported

   

See: Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:453. See Klein, Das Lukasevangelium, 401 ff. Including Philonenko, Das Vaterunser, 102. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:453. The power of to help one against temptation is probably the point of Jesus asking the disciples to watch and pray that they might not come into temptation (Matt 26:41).  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 202– 3.  The anarthrous nature of πειρασμός is referred to here.  This point is made presupposing God’s guidance of the steps of the righteous (Prov 16:9; 20:24) and his eyes being opened to them (Ps 34:15; 1 Pet 3:12), and further taking for granted he making a way out for the saints to bear under temptation (1 Cor 10:13) and his exclusive

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

89

to have taught his disciples to pray this way, for he himself is presented as having been tempted by “the devil” (according to Matt 4:1//Luke 4:2)⁴⁴³ and “the Satan” (according to Mark 1:13). Furthermore, he truly understands the role of prayer in withstanding temptation as the Gethsemane narratives portray: the sleeping disciples scattered (Peter even denied him) when the moment of trial came but the Master who went to pray could stand and not betray his Father. Following from this, it hardly needs stating that behind temptation, both in the present and at the last time, stands the evil one (devil/Satan) for which reason it makes sense to not only pray for preservation from it, but also for rescue from the principal source itself. It, therefore, explains the addition of the positive formulation, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ (“but rescue us from the evil one”). The positive formulation.⁴⁴⁴ Its genitive attribute, ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ presents a grammatic challenge as to whether it is a masculine or a neuter. Indeed, Greek usage entails both translation possibilities⁴⁴⁵ with context determining which part is in view. Majority of Matthean usages of the word is in the neuter case and he uses various senses spanning from “evil,” “evil one,” “evil doer” through to “unhealthy.”⁴⁴⁶ Explicit masculine case usage comes particularly in Matt 13:19, 38. For Luz then, the majority Matthean neuter usages and other NT evidence (including 2 Tim 4:18) as well as important Jewish parallels support a neuter case in this petition.⁴⁴⁷ In contrast, Lohse is of the view that references to ancient Jewish statements on the subject do not help in answering the question of neuter or masculine. For him both sides are possible.⁴⁴⁸ Nonetheless, Lohmeyer argued

knowledge of how to rescue them from trial but keep the wicked for the day of judgment (2 Pet 2:9).  Matt 4:3 refers to devil as “the Tempter” (ὁ πειράζων) too.  According to Lohmeyer (already cited), the only variation to this petition is, τῆς πονηρίας, “preserved in an Egyptian amulet from the sixth century A.D.” which he considers as an attempt to resolve the “ambivalence of τοῦ πονηροῦ (the) evil (one),” p. 209. Moreover, some consider it as a separate petition on its own, therefore counting seven petitions in the text instead of six. See Evans, Matthew. Even if in his explanations of the petitions he designates both petitions as the sixth petition (see p. 148).  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 85.  Compare for instance, his of the word in Matt 5:11, 37 and 6:23.  Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7, 1:454. He observes that the Latin Fathers since St. Augustine considered it as a neuter and the Catholics and Lutherans as a masculine. Lochman on his part notes that, “The rule in the early church was that the Greek fathers from Origen to Gregory Nazianus and Maximus the Confessor referred “evil” to the devil, while the Latins, especially under Augustine’s influence, mostly championed the more general neuter sense. The Reformers on the whole followed the Latins” (The Lord’s Prayer, 152). Cf. Lohfink, Das Vaterunser neu ausgelegt, 111– 14.  Lohse, Vater Unser, 85 – 86.

90

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

much earlier for a masculine case here noting that NT language has not an “abstract principle” but a “personal opponent” in view when it talks about “resisting” or “not resisting” in relation to evil or the devil.⁴⁴⁹ Surely, his position on the masculine case here is influenced by his explanation of temptation in the first part of the petition as the end time, eschatological day of trial which the devil is behind. Indeed, the NT (and other witnesses) allow the consideration (alongside Lohse) that both views are possible in ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. That notwithstanding, neuter or masculine interpretations should be considered as two sides of the same coin: abstract evil, or rather everyday evil has the evil one largely as its source. This, together with the explanation of temptation in the positive formulation above as one that seeks to draw persons away from God, explains the masculine translation ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ (“the evil one”) here. Accordingly, the following explanation takes into consideration the two sides of the issue (even if emphasis is laid on masculine as the source of the neuter aspect of the word).⁴⁵⁰ As much as the designation of the devil or Satan as the evil one in this case is peculiar to the NT, the idea of God delivering his people from (all) evil and prayers for such deliverance are not uncommon in the OT and in Jewish prayers. In the OT, the deliverance of Israel by God is inherently part of the covenant he established with them by which he takes up the responsibility of ensuring that he guides Israel to their destination, while Israel in turn “walks willingly in God’s way and (…) keeps from all transgression.”⁴⁵¹ This covenantal responsibility that God took upon himself also entailed that he leads Israel to “all good and deliver them from all evil.”⁴⁵² For this reason, not only does Jacob in blessing Joseph and his two sons, indirectly refer to God as the one “who has redeemed me from all evil,”⁴⁵³ the prophetic literature also refer to him as not just “our Father” but “our Redeemer” (Isa 63:16b; cf. 48:17). Moreover, there is plethora of petitions and prayers in the Psalter that convey this idea of God’s deliverance from evil. In Psalm 17:13b, the appeal is, “By your sword deliver my life from the wicked,” just as in Ps 140:1 it is, “Deliver me, O LORD, from the evildoers; protect me from those who are violent.” These do not only sound much like the text currently being studied, but they also corroborate further the assertion that the idea of God’s deliverance of his people from evil is prevalent in the OT.

 Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 215 – 16.  Cf. Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 154. For him, both understandings of ὁ πονηρός as either neuter or masculine can be seen in this petition.  Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 211.  Lohmeyer, 211.  Added emphasis.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

91

It even finds expression in the Wisdom of Solomon 16:8b: “that it is you who deliver from every evil.”⁴⁵⁴ Later Jewish prayer texts carry this idea further. For instance, the sixth benediction of the Eighteen Benedictions ends with, “Look upon our affliction and plead our cause, and redeem us speedily for thy name’s sake.” Similarly, it is said that Rabbi Jehuda adds at the end of this benediction, “May it be thy will, O Lord our God, and God of our Fathers, to deliver us from the imprudent and from imprudence, from an evil man, and from an evil companion, from an evil hap, from the evil impulse, from an evil neighbour, and from the destructive Satan.”⁴⁵⁵ Undeniably, what is evil here (especially in the OT tradition) is determined by God, his commands and obedience to them. In this regard, evil is therefore anything that is contrary to God (and his will).⁴⁵⁶ Consequently, the prayers for deliverance in the OT and later Judaism are largely prayers for deliverance from daily affliction, oppression, sin and indeed all evil. ⁴⁵⁷ It is also revealing that while the OT tradition as well as Judaism does not explicitly name the Satan as the evil one, the prayer of Rabbi Jehuda just quoted implies that everything builds up to the Satan—he is behind all the “every/all evil.” In the NT, the high priestly prayer of Jesus in John 17:15 comes close as a parallel to this petition: “I am not asking you to take them out of the world, but I ask you to protect them from the evil one (ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ).”⁴⁵⁸ Similarly, 2 Tim 4:18a expresses confident faith that, “The Lord will rescue (῾ρύσεται) me from every work of evil (ἀπὸ παντὸς ἔργου πονηροῦ).”⁴⁵⁹ Both references give the two sides of the question of evil: on the one hand it is personalized,⁴⁶⁰ but on the other hand it is impersonal; it is every work of evil.

 Added emphasis.  Quoted in: Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 209 – 10.  Cf. Günther Harder, ‘Πονηρός, Πονηρία’, in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1967), 551.  Harder, TDNT 6:560.  Translation mine.  Translation mine.  Jean Zumstein, Das Johannesevangelium, 1st ed., Kritisch-Exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 645 – 46. considers that the word can be both masculine as well as neuter and either way of considering it does not affect its explanation, because the masculine conception corresponds to a mythological understanding which indicates the power of evil. Cf. Udo Schnelle, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, 5th ed., Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 4, ed. Udo Schnelle and Jens Herzer (Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2016), 337, who thinks of it as referring to the unbelieving and the powers that want to break their connection to God.

92

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

That said, if, as considered, the genitive attribute in this petition is “the evil one” (i. e. referring to the Satan⁴⁶¹), then one may ask: what does the petition really mean? And does the aorist form of the predicate imply a one-time rescue and therefore an eschatological implication of the petition as Lohmeyer has argued? The data from Matt 5:37; 13:19 (Mark 4:15; Luke 8:12); Matt 13:38; Eph 6:16; 2 Thess 3:3; 2 Tim 4:18 and 1 Pet 5:8 permits the assumption that, indeed, the petition at hand takes seriously the reality and ubiquity of evil in the world and simultaneously recognises the infinite power of God to deliver his own from that evil. Based on this recognition and faith, therefore, it requests that God does not only preserve the believers from temptation (as in the negative formulation) which is the initial expression of evil, but to ultimately deliver (indeed rescue) them from the source of all that temptation, the evil one (the Satan/the devil). The aorist form of the predicate, in as much as it could indicate a one-time action as Lohmeyer asserts, does not hinder any assumption that this request for deliverance from the evil one pertains (in the first place) to the present, hereand-now living of the disciples. The evil one is bound to come after them in diverse ways because he has sown his “sons” among the sons of the kingdom too.⁴⁶² Certainly, an implied eschatological dimension in this petition is only tenable insofar as the evil one and the full revelation of his works will be destroyed by the breath and manifestation of the Lord’s coming⁴⁶³ at which time the decisive once and for all rescue from the evil one and all evil will be realised.

2.9.9 The doxology: For yours is the kingdom, the power and the glory in the eternities, Amen The Lord’s Prayer in current usage ends with a triadic doxology⁴⁶⁴ which, as noted in the textual criticism, is not found in the best available MSS of Matthew’s Gospel neither is it found in the Lucan version of the text. The earliest literary witness of a doxology attached to the LP is found in the Didache.⁴⁶⁵ The differ-

 A characterisation of the Satan (also known as the devil or the enemy or the accuser) will not be attempted here. That is done in detail in Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 217– 225.  See Matt 13:37– 39.  See 2 Thess 2:8b.  According to Lohmeyer, The Lord’s Prayer, 231., “Since Origen’s great commentary on the Lord’s Prayer, this sentence [referring to the doxology] has been called a ‘doxology’; it thus takes its place among those stereotyped sentences which are in some way meant to praise God (…).”  Lohmeyer, 230.

2.9 Explanation of the petitions

93

ence in the formulation of the doxology between the Didache and the current triadic one reveals that it did not receive a fixed wording from the beginning until much later.⁴⁶⁶ But why was it added in the first place and was that novel to the LP? For Schattner-Rieser, its later addition marks the time when the text attained a liturgical status. In other words, when the LP moved from being a private prayer to a liturgical prayer, the doxology was added.⁴⁶⁷ Obviously, the Jewish background to the text which has been recognized throughout this exposition provides a firm tradition of prayers ending with doxologies of different formulations, but in most cases picking up the concepts, “power,” “glory” and “kingdom” or “dominion” all in relation to God. It serves in that context as a seal to the petitions made. ⁴⁶⁸ The often cited OT reference as a parallel (or say forerunner) to the doxology of the LP is 1 Chr 29:11– 13 where King David blessed YHWH in respect of the offerings given for the building of the temple by acknowledging, “Yours, O LORD, are the greatness, the power, the glory, the victory, and the majesty; for all that is in the heavens and on the earth is yours; yours is the kingdom, O LORD, and you are exalted as head above all (…).”⁴⁶⁹ Obviously, all the three concepts in the doxology, namely, kingdom, power and glory are found in this davidic blessing. Not only is this found here, but Psalm 106 in recounting the constant rebellion of Israel in the light of God’s acts of deliverance, care and forgiveness, also ends by confessing, “Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel, from everlasting to everlasting. And let all the people say, “Amen” (…)” (vs. 48). In later Judaism, this firm Jewish tradition is still to be seen, for each of the petitions of the Eighteen Benedictions⁴⁷⁰ ends with a similarly formulated doxology summarising the point of the petition. The NT continues this tradition in different places and forms: “For from him and through him and in him are all things; to him be the glory in the eternities. Amen,”⁴⁷¹ declares Paul in Rom 11:36. Similarly, Second Timothy 4:18 confesses, “The Lord will indeed rescue me from all works of evil and he will save me into his heavenly kingdom; to whom be the glory in the eternities of the eternities, amen.”⁴⁷² What is clear in all this is that ending prayers with doxologies is

 Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 88 – 89.  Schattner-Rieser, ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser’, 134.  Cf. Lohse, Vater Unser, 88 – 89.  Emphasis mine.  To which several references have been made.  Translation and emphasis mine.  Translation and emphasis mine. Revelation has more of such doxologies to offer: See Rev 1:6; 4:11; 11:17; 19:6b.

94

2 Exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13)

not new to the LP but its addition to the prayer is influenced by its Jewish (and NT) background. The threefold doxology here gives a logical and firm close to the petitions by starting with the conjunction ὁτι. Its concepts⁴⁷³ of kingdom, power and glory seem to recap the first three petitions, hallowing of the name, coming of the kingdom and the doing of the will. Certainly, hallowing of God’s name touches on his glory just as it takes his might to execute his will. Both divine will and divine name find their place in his kingdom, all of which are his in the limitless stretch of ‘time’ called eternity. Therefore, the doxology does not only seal the petitions made as is usual in the religious-historical background of the LP, but it also redirects attention back to the person of God himself who indeed has all the resources to faithfully and reliably respond accordingly to the petitions made by his children, the disciples. For Lohfink, it (the doxology) is about the fact that God is mightier than all the powers and forces of the world community and it is not the evil one (or evil) that has the last word in history, but God.⁴⁷⁴ To this the believers affirm with an “Amen,” that it may truly be so.

2.10 Conclusion At a text pragmatic level, it was observed that Matthew with his text of the LP sought to teach his audience right praying by presenting them with a model of a right and succinct prayer. As can be seen from the exegesis, the succinctness is, however, not to be understood at the surface level, for the matters that are brought before the heavenly Father are deeper and broader in their reach: God’s name, kingdom, will and the needs (food, forgiveness and security) of the praying disciples are, in light of the kingdom-bringing mission of Jesus, of great relevance reaching back to the heart of Jesus’s proclamation. Their relevance could explain the key role the text played in the life of the early Jesus movement (as could be guessed from the Gospel witness) and its later and current forms. The foregoing exegesis, therefore, accounts for the historical biblical horizon of the text. It is clear from the historical biblical dimension that the text, which was originally taught by Jesus (its oral form), was part of the reconstructed Q and was later re-worked into the Gospel traditions of Matthew and Luke. As already

 See Lochman, The Lord’s Prayer, 162– 71., pp. 162– 171, for further explication of each of these concepts.  Lohfink, Das Vaterunser neu ausgelegt, 11.

2.10 Conclusion

95

indicated in the introduction to this work, the manner in which each of these two Evangelists inserts the text into their respective Jesus story reveals their unique reception of the text and thus could qualify as the earliest reception of the text. Therefore, the way is paved for an investigation to be conducted into its receptions in a later context (i. e. Ghana) than Matthew and Luke. Before that, however, the next parts, noting the importance of context for biblical reception, will present and discuss the nature of the Ghanaian reception context within which the study was carried out.

3 The Ghanaian context 3.1 Introduction The heading of this part presupposes a single unique context that can easily be described. That is however not the case. Therefore, in this part the precise context in view will be defined noting the possible contextual factors that are at play in it. This is informed by the understanding that reception of any kind takes place in a specific time and space which impinge on it. Given that the entire Ghanaian context cannot be covered in a short-term study like this, the present work is limited to 1) the Ghanaian Christian context(s) and 2) the period after the political independence of Ghana in 1957. In other words, in terms of context, “the Ghanaian context” is actually defined to be and limited largely to the Christian space in Ghana. And the time in mind is the period from 1957 till present. However, since the Ghanaian Christian context itself is a subsect of the larger differentiated Ghanaian context in which it participates and finds its unique expression, the discussion of context here will also consider factors that shape this larger context. The limitation of the time period to post-independence is because that is when one could really speak of “Ghana” as a political entity. Despite limiting the context largely to the Christian space, in the last part of the study, this limit will be traversed by considering a unique reception of the LP outside the Christian context. The significant factors of the larger Ghanaian context worth discussing here include (but are not limited to) the political, economic and socio-religious (which also embraces questions of worldviews) spheres of the Ghanaian society. Accordingly, these factors will be considered first after which the study context itself, namely the Ghanaian Christian context, will be discussed. This will be done by descriptively presenting the Christian space in Ghana, limiting it solely to the three loosely categorised major streams of Christianity in the country, namely mission founded/mainline Christianity, African Instituted Christianity (AIC) and Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity (PCC).

3.2 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana With a population of about twenty-eight (28) million people (as at 2010),⁴⁷⁵ Ghana, like most African countries, brings loosely together different ethnic  That’s according to the last Population and Housing Census in 2010. Current population https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-005

3.2 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana

97

groups with over forty (40) different languages as well as different cultural backgrounds. These ethnic groups differ from one another because they predate the present Ghanaian state which is only a political construction after independence from colonial rule in 1957. In pre-colonial (and indeed in colonial) times, they existed as different and distinct ethnic groups with different kinship and descent systems before they were lumped together at independence into the present Ghanaian state, hence the existence of linguistic plurality in the current Ghanaian society. Indeed, the linguistic gap widens increasingly as one moves from the northern parts of the country to the southern parts partly due to the different language branches to which the various languages belong. Some of the major languages are Akan (i. e. Asante-Twi, Mfantse, Akwapim-Twi, etc.), Ga, Ewe, Dagbani, Likpakpaaln (of Kokomba), Mampruli, Kusaal (of the Kusaas), Dangme, Muar and many others. Like most African languages, Ghanaian languages descend from the Niger-Congo language family and most of them in turn fall into the Kwa and Gur branches.⁴⁷⁶ As shortly stated, there are differences in descent systems among the various ethnic groups. Descent as a sociological category is used here to mean, “the process by which direct genealogical connection is traced between an individual and his[/her] forebears for the purpose of recruitment into kin groups.”⁴⁷⁷ The process of tracing these genealogical ties is regulated by rules and principles, termed as the descent system. By these rules and principles, some of the ethnic groups in Ghana claim their genealogical connection directly from the male line only, thus constituting what is called the patrilineal descent system while others too trace theirs from the female line only, thus constituting the maternal descent system. ⁴⁷⁸ Some of the ethnic groups that fall under the patrilineal system include the Ga, Ewe, Tallensi, Lowiili, Konkomba, etc. On the other hand, those that fall under the matrilineal system include mainly the Akan who constitute by far the largest⁴⁷⁹ ethnic group in Ghana. The point of the foregoing is that Ghana as a country is not, socio-culturally stating, homogenous. That notwithstanding, it helps to add that the process of

estimate, however, pegs it at about thirty million people. The next census will be conducted in 2021.  See, David M Eberhard, Gary F Simons, and Charles D Fennig, eds., Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 22nd ed. (Dallas, Texas: SIL International, 2019), https://www.ethnologue.com/ language/kus.  Godwin K. Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana: An Introduction to Sociology, 2nd ed. (Accra: Ghana Universities Press, 2003), 19.  Nukunya, 19.  This group constitutes about 47 % of the total population of Ghana.

98

3 The Ghanaian context

social change in the Ghanaian society (since colonial times till date), fuelled largely by colonialism, the advent of Christianity, formal classroom education, money-using economy,⁴⁸⁰ etc., has led to increased social interactions among the different groups including inter-ethnic marriages (with its attendant challenges). These factors have inter alia resulted in urbanisation and rural-urban drift⁴⁸¹ as some members of especially the northern ethnic groups move down South to big cities such as Kumasi and Accra (the capital city) where industries and better institutions of higher learning like universities are located. In other words, they migrate to look for work (i. e. economic reasons) and pursue higher education (i. e. educational reasons).⁴⁸² Through these, inter-ethnic interaction and association are intensified. Religiously, the country, like most African states, is home to three main religions: 1) Christianity which claims about seventy percent (70 %) of the population, 2) Islam which has about 17 percent and 3) African Traditional Religions (ATRs)⁴⁸³ which take about five percent.

 Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana, 166.  Nukunya, 166.  Noteworthy is that the northern parts for many years lag(ged) in economic and educational development largely because in colonial times these parts were not part of the Crown British Colony which was largely concentrated down South especially along the coastal areas. This meant historically that most of the economic, educational and social developments that the colonial administration undertook got concentrated in the Colony to the detriment of the northern parts which were collectively called the British protectorates (Northern Territories). That aside, it is intimated that the British colonial policy of isolating northern Ghana to be “a pool of labour” by barring Christian missionaries from introducing formal Western education there contributed to its economic and educational lag; see Solomon S. Sule-Saa, ‘The Redemptive Role of Mother-Tongue Scriptures: The Case of the Dagomba and Konkomba of Northern Ghana’, Journal of African Christian Thought 11, no. 1 (June 2008): 18. Only after independence did sustained meaningful socio-economic and educational development start. For instance, as part of the initiative to bridge the educational gap between the two parts of the country, a free education scheme which saw those attending school in the North exempted from school fees was introduced.  For an in depth discussion on this see, Cephas Narh Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism: A Study of the Development of Charismatic Renewal in the Mainline Churches in Ghana, Mission: Missiologisch Onderzoek in Nederland 32 (Zoetermeer: Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 2002), 26 – 31; Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana, 55 – 65.

3.2 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana

99

Figure 1: Ghana’s Population by Religious Affiliation (%) Ghana Statistical Service (2012) [adapted].

The religiosity of the country is better appreciated when one discusses each of these three major religions and other religious movements in Ghana as has been done in other works.⁴⁸⁴ Moreover, religiosity in Ghana is much like the rest of Africa. Werner Kahl has aptly described it as one not limited to intellectual activity but encompasses the entire human being just as it is not reserved to the individual or considered as a private activity but as a collective and public affair: “Religiosität ist nicht etwa auf intellektulle Aktivität beschränkt – etwa als Anerkenntnis eines Glaubenssystems – sondern sie erfasst den ganzen Menschen in all seinen Lebensbezügen, d. h. neben seinen denkerischen Fähigkeiten auch sein Fühlen und Handeln. Religion ist darüber hinaus weder eine primär individuelle noch private, sondern gemeinschaftliche und öffentliche Angelegenheit.”⁴⁸⁵ Furthermore, for the present purposes, a discussion of the different religions will not be repeated here except to make short remarks on Christian-Muslim relations in Ghana as well as draw on parts of African Traditional Religions whose

 Like that of Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 24– 33.  Werner Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter: Westafrikanische Bibelinterpretationen und ihre Relevanz für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, New Testament Studies in Contextual Exegesis 2 (Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2007), 232. Certainly, he makes this observation as a contrast to his German Western background where religion is generally resigned to the private and individual spheres.

100

3 The Ghanaian context

belief system forms the initial basis of any belief in the Supernatural and conception of reality among Ghanaians. This will be important here because an understanding of what will later be termed as “a/the Ghanaian worldview or cosmology” is relevant for gauging Ghanaian Christians’ understanding and interpretation of scripture. Moreover, Christianity will, however, receive a separate and more detailed discussion later because of the focus of this work. That noted, it is observed that Christians and Muslims have co-existed in Ghana since both faiths were introduced into the country centuries before the political independence of Ghana. Indeed, “Islam was well established through the trading enterprises of Wangara Muslims in most of the trading towns in Ghana before the Christian missionaries set foot on the Gold Coast [now Ghana],” for “Northern Ghana saw Islam as early as the 15th Century (…).”⁴⁸⁶ The constitutional guarantee of religious freedom allows for religions to compete for adherents in the public space using various means and recently the mass media.⁴⁸⁷ The relations between adherents of both religions are aptly described by two Ghanaian experts on Christian-Muslim relations: John Azumah observes that, “On occasions such as weddings and child naming ceremonies, and even the ordination of priests, Muslims are known to come to church and the vice versa because the ceremony involves a friend or relative.”⁴⁸⁸ Similarly, John Mbillah notes, “(…) one can notice Christians and Muslims living as members of the same family, sharing in the joys of birth and the sadness of death and celebrating religious festivals together; as if there were no stark differences between Christianity and Islam.”⁴⁸⁹ This picture of harmonious co-existence between Christianity and Islam in Ghana does not exclude intermittent tensions and even in some cases violent clashes.⁴⁹⁰ The part of ATRs that is of interest in this work is the culturally grounded beliefs that inform the conception of reality and perception of the world, which is

 Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 31.  See Article 21 (1) a, c of the Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992 (Accra: Ghana Publishing Company Ltd., n.d.), 15.  John Azumah, ‘Controversy and Restraint in Ghana’, Transformation: An International Journal of Holistic Mission Studies 17 (2000): 24.  John A. Mbillah, ‘An African Reflection on A Common Word’, in We Have Justice in Common: Christian and Muslim Voices from Asia and Africa, ed. C. W. SJ. Troll, H. Reifeld, and C. T. R. Hewer (Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V., 2010), 93 – 94.  For more on this see Chapter Three of Michael Fuseini Wandusim, “Young People and Interreligious Dialogue: The Perspective of Young People on Interreligious Dialogue in the Context of Christian-Muslim Dialogue in Ghana” (Master of Arts Thesis, Georg-August Universität Göttingen, 2016), unpublished.

3.2 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana

101

termed here Ghanaian ontology and cosmology.⁴⁹¹ To discuss this further, the Akan group will be used as an example. Discussing the theme of African philosophical thought through the Akan conceptual scheme, Kwame Gyekye⁴⁹² notes that Akan ontology is pluralistic, because it consists of the Supreme Being (i. e. Nyame or Onyame),⁴⁹³ deities, ancestors, human beings and then the physical world.⁴⁹⁴ But all the deities, ancestors, human beings and the physical world take their reality from Nyame who created all of them, for he is the Ultimate Reality and the others are derivatives.⁴⁹⁵ Therefore, Gyekye asserts, “Other entities are real because, being rooted in Onyame [i. e. the Supreme Being], they partake of, or participate in, his reality.”⁴⁹⁶ In actual fact, per his analysis, the Akan ontology is also monistic because the listed deities and other beings are hierarchically headed by the one God who created all of them.⁴⁹⁷ Before continuing, it is worth noting here that what has just being presented underscores one important fact that has well been articulated in African Christian theologies: “The concept of the High God (…) appears to be common to all Ghanaian societies long before the advent of Christianity and Islam.”⁴⁹⁸ In other words, Ghanaians (and other Africans for that matter) knew and acknowledged the existence of the Supreme Being whom they considered as the creator of the heavens and earth just like the Jews. One concrete testimony of this knowledge is the names given to this Being by different ethnic groups in Ghana: in Akan he is Nyame or Onyame, in Ewe he is Mawu, in Mamprusi he is Nwuni,

 Here, one risks generalisation which sometimes conceals particularities in each context. As much as for discussion purposes one could use general terms like “the Ghanaian ontology,” “the Ghanaian worldview or cosmology,” the truth is that in the realities of these terms, there are peculiarities among the ethnic groups. That notwithstanding, there are points of convergence and commonalities (in part due to several years of co-existence and interactions within the same geographical space).  A late Ghanaian Professor of Philosophy.  Referring to the God of Christian faith.  Kwame Gyekye, An Essay on African Philosophical Thought: The Akan Conceptual Scheme (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), 69. While Gyekye’s analysis puts the ancestors after the deities, John Pobee in his analysis presents the spiritual arrangement the other way round: ancestors first before deities (which in his categorisation, he terms, “smaller gods”), see: John S. Pobee, Toward an African Theology (Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1979), 44– 51. See also, Kwame Bediako, ‘Biblical Exegesis in Africa: The Significance of the Translated Scriptures’, in African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, ed. Diane B. Stinton, SPCK International Study Guide 46 (London: SPCK, 2010), 18.  Gyekye, An Essay on African Philosophical Thought, 69 – 70.  Gyekye, 72.  Gyekye, 76.  Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana, 56.

102

3 The Ghanaian context

in Ga he is Nyonmo, in Gonja he is Eboore, in Tallensi he is Nayiwum,⁴⁹⁹ in Kusaal he is Wina’am, etc. This High God so acknowledged in the different ethnic groups is never a direct object of worship in traditional Ghanaian society, even if he is approached in different ways by individuals, as people, for e. g., invoke him in times of need, pray to him for wellbeing and give him thanks for “favourable happenings.”⁵⁰⁰ If the High God in traditional Ghanaian religious consciousness was and is never a direct object of worship, the “small gods” as G. K. Nukunya terms them are in contrast the direct objects of worship, having shrines, priests, congregations and fellowship. These gods are often linked to trees, rivers, lagoons, forests, rocks, etc. But these nature elements are, by themselves, in no wise the direct objects of worship,⁵⁰¹ because, per Gyekye’s analysis, they are a lower reality relative to human beings and since, as will shortly be seen, the Akan (and by extension Ghanaian) ontology is a hierarchical one, only higher realities are worshipped and that by lower realities. Hence these nature elements are only thought of as possessing the “spirits” of the deities or the small gods and to that extent, are channels of worshipping the gods in them.⁵⁰² Nukunya from his sociological exploration of the subject also observes that the small gods do not hold absolute powers, for they are subject to the High God from whom also they derive their powers: “It is an important aspect of Ghanaian traditional religion that the small gods are never considered ultimate in terms of their power. They are controlled by the Supreme Being and derive their powers from him.”⁵⁰³ Nukunya’s point here raises a problematic question as to the existence of evil, for in some respects, as Gyekye makes clear, the small gods are also said to hold power for both good and evil and thus are not wholly good.⁵⁰⁴ The problematic question arises because, if the High God is considered entirely good and cannot be considered a source of evil as Gyekye’s exploration of the Akan ontology reveals, then the power derived from him should not be used for evil as well. Gyekye, however, points out that, which could balance Nukunya’s problematic point, even though in Akan theology and cosmology, the deities (small gods in Nukunya’s categorisation) are created by God, they have independent existence.⁵⁰⁵

 See Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana, 56.  Nukunya, 56.  Nukunya, 56.  This, by the way, corrects the wrong notion that traditional Ghanaians (and other Africans) worship trees, animals, water bodies, etc.  Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana, 56.  Gyekye, An Essay on African Philosophical Thought, 124.  Gyekye, 124.

3.2 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana

103

Having noted this, the point was made earlier that the Akan ontology is also monistic because all other beings are subject to and headed by the High God. In this light, the Akan ontology is, put differently, a hierarchical one where higher realities have power over lower realities. This hierarchical ontology consequently informs the Akan conception of causality. In this conception, everything has a cause. The physical sphere is responsible for the ordinary everyday events, but the spiritual causes the extraordinary events.⁵⁰⁶ The spiritual causality is vertical, because, as indicated above, the high realities exert influence over (and can even destroy) the lower realities.⁵⁰⁷ That is, Nyame can for e. g. destroy the deities, the ancestors, human beings and the physical space, just as the deities and the ancestors can also destroy or influence the human beings and the physical space. What one sees here then is a “dual causality” resulting from a “dual reality”: the physical, perceptible world occupied by the humans and the spiritual, imperceptible world occupied by Nyame, deities and ancestors.⁵⁰⁸ Because the spiritual has a higher reality over the physical, it is believed to influence events of the physical, positively and negatively. While Gyekye confined his study to the Akan, one can argue that the notion of a dual causality stemming from a dual reality largely applies to other ethnic groups in the country,⁵⁰⁹ so that one can risk a generalization with some level of certainty by using such terms as “the Ghanaian cosmology or worldview” as will be seen hereafter. Following from this dual ontology and dual causality, one can describe the Ghanaian worldview simply as one in which the spiritual world (a higher reality) influences the events of the physical world (a lower reality).⁵¹⁰ Kwabena Asa-

 Gyekye, 83.  Gyekye, 83.  One must add here that the ancestors in Ghanaian (Akan) traditional understanding are still part of the living community even if they are not seen. That is why they are invited to participate in ceremonies such as outdooring/naming ceremonies through the pouring of libation. They are therefore termed as the ‘living-dead.’  See Rebecca Y. Ganusah, “Pouring Libation to Spirit Powers among the Ewe-Dome of Ghana: An Indigeneous Religious and Biblical Perspective,” in The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories and Trends, ed. Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube (Leiden. Boston. Köln: Brill, 2000), who sees similar understandings among the Ewe-Dome (a sub-ethnic group among the Ewe ethnic group) in Ghana. See also, for the Kusaas in northeasten Ghana, Ernst Haaf, Die Kusase: Eine Medizinisch-Ethnologische Studie Über Einen Stamm in Nordghana, Giessener Beiträge Zur Entwicklungsforschung 1 (Stuttgart: Fischer, 1967), 28 – 29. cf. Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter, 228.  See also Werner Kahl, ‘Jesus Power Super Power-Productive Friction in Intercultural Hermeneutics: A German Perspective’, Journal of Mother Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics 1, no. 1 (2015): 90.

104

3 The Ghanaian context

moah-Gyadu⁵¹¹ describes it as one of “mystical causality.”⁵¹² It permits the belief in “malevolent forces thought able to harm human health and impede progress.”⁵¹³ From his sociological observation, Nukunya states that this is a general belief in Ghana that supernatural forces of different kinds are behind both success and misfortune.⁵¹⁴ John Pobee too describes this view of reality as follows: “(…) at both individual and communal levels, stands the rationale that a person is surrounded by numerous hosts of spirit-beings, some good, some evil, which can and do influence the course of human life good or ill. Consequently, their goodwill is actively and constantly sought, thereby acknowledging the dependence of the living on the spirit world.”⁵¹⁵ This worldview so described, therefore, influences how the average Ghanaian interprets life events: negative events such as inexplicable sicknesses, infertility and childlessness, extra-ordinary draught, etc., are caused by the evil deities and unappeased ancestors, while generally good things are caused by Nyame and the good spirits as well as the ancestors. Consequently, the average Ghanaian will appeal⁵¹⁶ to the spiritual before embarking on any significant adventure in life, like setting up a business, building a house, marriage, running for political office, going for job interviews, etc., because the spiritual, as a higher reality, holds power over the physical, a lower reality. In the same way, he/she may immediately attribute success in life to, not his/her own efforts, but God or the ancestors and conversely attribute failures and mishaps to the evil spirits.⁵¹⁷ It is important for this study to not only underline that biblical texts/messages are understood within this given worldview,⁵¹⁸ but also to note that it permeates the economic and political fabrics of the country, such that state actors such as presidents and ministers of state could refer to the grace of God in man-

 A leading Ghanaian Professor in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity.  Kwabena J. Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Anointing through the Screen: Neo-Pentecostalism and Televised Christianity in Ghana’, Studies in World Christianity 11, no. 1 (2005): 9.  Kwabena J. Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity: Interpretations from an African Context (Akropong-Akwapem: Regnum Africa, 2013), 12.  Nukunya, Tradition and Change in Ghana, 64.  Pobee, Toward an African Theology, 45.  This appeal could take the form of consulting a native priest(ess) or generally in pouring libations to the ancestors or family gods, i. e. if one is a traditionalist, or resorting to intensive prayers and fasting or consulting a pastor (colloquially known as “Man/Woman of God”), if one is a Christian, or a Mallam if one is a Muslim.  This does not imply an overly spiritualised existence that rules out any critical thinking and individual responsibility, but an expression of a life lived in acknowledgement of the existence of other spheres of power beyond human beings.  Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter, 228.

3.2 Socio-religious context and worldview in Ghana

105

aging the affairs of the country. For instance, in 2017 a Minster for Finance,⁵¹⁹ in presenting a national budget to the Ghanaian Parliament, quoted verses from the NT largely alluding in economic terms to Jesus’s feeding of the crowd with a few bread and fish (i. e. Matt 14:13 – 21; 15:32– 39). In another instance, the Vice President, Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, as the keynote speaker addressing the “4th National Policy Summits” in Tamale on 24th September 2018 on the theme, “Assessing the flagship programmes of government” in which he assessed the ruling government’s programmes over a period of 20 months and what government will do thereafter, used the phrases, “by the grace of God,” “by the grace of Allah,” “ishah Allah” severally and interchangeably. Moreover, in national and state gatherings such as inauguration of a new president, representatives of the three major religions in the country are invited to make prayers for the occasion, the new president and his new parliament (as it is usually the case) and the whole country. As much as one may rightly argue that having representatives of these religions at such a gathering is a mere political tactic of an incoming government to demonstrate that it will be religiously neutral and will not prefer one religion to the other, it is inevitable to overlook the undertone of this pervasive worldview in such a political move. That aside, the religiosity that issues from this underlying worldview is further hard for the political establishment of the country to ignore such that in the choice of political candidates, especially presidential and vice presidential candidates, political parties strive to select candidates to represent a religious balance: most preferably a Christian and a Muslim will be selected for contesting national presidential elections—the president being a Christian and vice president a Muslim.⁵²⁰ This on the face of it too could be seen as a mere political move to win the religious masses, but behind such moves is the attempt to demonstrate understanding of the religious sensibilities of Ghanaians, for “a common and important credential of candidates seeking election to various [political] positions [is] ‘a God/fearing person’.”⁵²¹ Why have “a God-fearing person” for a national political leader? My assumption based on the discussion already presented on the Ghanaian cosmology is that, precisely because God is the ultimate reality who wields decisive influence over all other realities, who can

 Ken Offori-Atta.  Since the inauguration of the continuing Fourth Republic, there have only being two instances of such pairing: the New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) government of 2000 – 2008, saw a Christian President, J. A. Kuffour and a Muslim Vice President, Alhaji Aliu Mahama; and since 2016 the NPP government again has a Christian President, Nana Addo Danquah Akufo-Addo and a Muslim Vice President, Alhaji Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 19.

106

3 The Ghanaian context

change the economic and social fortunes of people, and to that extent, if a leader has his backing, as God-fearing persons are presumed to have, such a leader will be able to lead the people to socio-economic success. Furthermore, not only does the political arena demonstrate consciousness of this pervasive worldview in the selection of political candidates, it is also common during electioneering campaigns for, “Party slogans and songs [to be] either full of religious slogans or (…) rhythms of religious songs and hymns.”⁵²² Similarly, it is further not uncommon for candidates to seek help from various leaders of the three main religions.⁵²³ This they do by visiting mostly churches on Sundays and mosques on Fridays during which they appeal to congregants to pray for them. The presentation under this subsection, in summary, underscores the fact that Ghana is a socio-culturally diverse country and has a highly developed and intensive religious consciousness and sensibility (informed by the underlying worldview) which permeate not only the social fabric but also the political and the economic spheres which will be presented next.

3.3 Political and economic contexts The political and economic contexts are discussed here together because they function in tandem in determining especially the political fortunes of political parties on the one hand, and the economic and social wellbeing of Ghanaians on the other hand. In other words, political decisions, policies of political parties especially those geared towards job creation—the number one campaign promise of all political parties in Ghana during electioneering campaigns—and stabilisation of the economy largely determine the economic lives of the people when they are implemented. Conversely, good economic performance becomes a strategic political capital for political parties in terms of appealing to the electorate for re-election or running viable political campaigns. Beginning with the political context then, it is observed that the current sustained peaceful and stable political landscape of Ghana⁵²⁴ since the inauguration of the continuing Fourth Republic in 1992 is largely a product of the political history of post-independent Ghana. The pre-Fourth Republic political period is checked with democratic, authoritarian and military regimes. As an erstwhile British Colony, Ghana gained political independence—the first in sub-Saharan

 Omenyo, 19.  Cf. Omenyo, 19.  See Omenyo, 14– 16. on Ghana as a political entity.

3.3 Political and economic contexts

107

Africa to do so—in 1957 from Great Britain. At independence in 1957, the Convention People’s Party (CPP) with its leader, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah was at the helm of affairs in taking over from the British colonial administration. Afterwards, in 1st July 1960, following a referendum in 1958, Ghana became officially a Republic with Dr. Nkrumah as its first Executive President.⁵²⁵ Dr. Nkrumah with his CPP government was, however, overthrown on 24th February 1966 by Lt. Gen. Emmanuel Kwasi Kotoka and Brigadier Akwasi Amankwaa Afrifa in a military coup d’état, alleging corruption within the CPP government.⁵²⁶ With the ousting of the CPP government which eventually declared Ghana a one-party state in 1964,⁵²⁷ the First Republic after independence was over and a new regime under the National Liberation Council (NLC) took over. The NLC under the leadership of Gen. Joseph Ankrah, determined to restore the country back to civilian rule, took the country to the polls in August 1969 in which the Progress Party (PP) won.⁵²⁸ With this development, another Republic, the Second Republic in the country’s political history came into existence. But it was short lived, for the military by coup took over governance again in 1972 establishing the National Redemption Council (NRC) led by Gen. I. K. Acheampong.⁵²⁹ The NRC metamorphosed itself into Supreme Military Council (SMC I) in 1975 only to experience a palace coup in 1978 with the then Chief of Defence Staff, Lt. Gen. Frederick Akoffu assuming power and transforming the SMC into SMC II.⁵³⁰ With a plan to organise general elections the following year in June 1979, the SMC II lifted a ban imposed by the SMC I on setting up political associations, but it could not realise that aim because a group of junior officers of the military led by Ft. Lt. J. J. Rawlings (who will be a major and influential political actor in the country’s political scene until 2000) staged an unsuccessful coup in May 1979, leading to the imprisonment of its leader.⁵³¹ Not giving up on their plan, the junior officers re-staged their coup, succeeded in it and released their imprisoned leader, Flt. Lt. Rawlings who will upon his release together with his team form the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC).⁵³² Like the previous military regimes, the AFRC had

 Omenyo, 16.  Omenyo, 16, Cf. Paul Gifford, African Christianity: Its Public Role (London: C. Hurst & Co. Ltd., 1998), 58.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 16.  Omenyo, 17.  Omenyo, 17.  Omenyo, 17.  Omenyo, 17; Gifford, African Christianity, 58.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 17.

108

3 The Ghanaian context

plans of returning the country back to civilian rule and accordingly organised and oversaw the general elections in June 1979 that were scheduled by the previous regime. These general elections in which five political parties contested— the Action Congress Party (ACP), the People’s National Party (PNP), the United National Convention (UNC), the Popular Front Party (PFP), and the Social Democratic Front (SDF)—saw the PNP under the leadership of Dr. Hilla Limann winning⁵³³ and consequently inaugurating the Third Republic. But this Republic too, the shortest of all since independence, was overthrown by Flt. Lt. Rawlings on 31st December 1981 after which he dissolved parliament, set the constitution aside and disallowed all political parties existing at the time.⁵³⁴ This time, it was no longer AFRC but Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) that Flt. Lt. Rawlings ruled the country with, with no indication of immediate transfer of power to a civilian government. It is noteworthy that almost all the reasons that informed the various military coup d’états that have been recounted above were purely economic ones, mostly subsumed under corruption. For instance, the overthrow of the Dr. Nkrumah and his CPP was against the background of “the country’s economic difficulties and alleged corruption within the CPP,” just as the same economic difficulties formed the basis for the overthrow of the Second Republic under the K. A. Busia and J. E. Akuffo-Addo’s led government.⁵³⁵ Similarly, both the AFRC and the PNDC in their respective periods of taking over power had the aim of ridding the country of corruption and mismanagement.⁵³⁶ (All this, by the way, substantiates the point made above that the political and economic sectors of the country are interlinked and thus the discussion of them here together.) As previously stated, the PNDC had no intentions of immediately reverting the country back to civilian rule and this was confirmed by its rule of the country until 1992 when Chairman Rawlings (as Flt. Lt. J. J. Rawlings was later affectionately called) led the country back to civilian rule after organising a referendum on 28th May 1992 in which Ghanaians endorsed a new constitution (what is since then called the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana)⁵³⁷ and general elections on 3rd November 1992. In this significant political development, not only did the PNDC’s Chairman Rawlings disrobe his military garments and put on civilian ones to contest the elections, the PNDC transformed itself into the National

    

Omenyo, 17– 18. Omenyo, 18, Cf. Gifford, African Christianity, 59. Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 16 – 17. Omenyo, 18. Omenyo, 18.

3.3 Political and economic contexts

109

Democratic Congress (NDC). The NDC and Rawlings won the 1992 polls by 58.3 % of valid votes cast and consequently formed the first government of the current Fourth Republic.⁵³⁸ In sum, Cephas Omenyo describes the post-independence political history of Ghana as being “largely characterised by instability, stress, distress, tension and suspicion. Some of the coups that took place,” he observes, “particularly the 1979 coup, deprived people of their dear ones as well as valuable property.”⁵³⁹ Since its inauguration, the Fourth Republic has witnessed seven successive and ‘peaceful’ conducts of national elections within a multi-party democratic setting and supervised by an independent Electoral Commission. The first was the 1992 elections which Rawlings and his NDC won, the second was in 1996 which Rawlings and his NDC again won by 57.4 %,⁵⁴⁰ the third was in 2000 which is considered a watershed moment in Ghanaian democratic history because for the first time in the post-independence political history, one political party peacefully handed over power through the ballot box⁵⁴¹ to another political party. For, the New Patriotic Party (NPP) won the elections.⁵⁴² The fourth election was in 2004 won again by the NPP, the fifth was in 2008 won by the NDC as a ‘comeback,’ the sixth was in 2012 with NDC retaining power having won the elections and the seventh was in 2016 which brought back the NPP.⁵⁴³ Hence, it goes without stating that since 1992 political power has alternated peacefully between the two major political parties.⁵⁴⁴ Certainly, within a winner-take-all political space as it has been since 1992, the conduct of elections within the Fourth Republic has not escaped pockets of political violence, as every election becomes, crudely put, ‘a-do-and-die-affair.’ That does not, however, dispute the fact that political power has peacefully been transferred from one party to the other and back to the other as the foregoing historical sketch depicts.⁵⁴⁵

 Gifford, African Christianity, 59 – 60.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 18.  Gifford, African Christianity, 61.  And not the barrel of the gun.  The NPP is still the ruling party at the time of writing this section.  At the time of publication, the eighth election, scheduled for December 2020, had taken place with the NPP retaining power.  It is important to state that they are not the only political parties in the Ghana. There are indeed about 24 registered political parties, according to my checks on the Electoral Commission of Ghana’s website at the time of writing this section. They have only with time become the two major political parties capable of winning general elections since 1992.  Ruling the country from 1992 to 2000, the NDC surrendered power in a general election to the then major opposition party, NPP which also ruled till 2008 and lost it back to the NDC. The NDC lost power again to the NPP in the 2016 general election. The country’s democratic history

110

3 The Ghanaian context

Additionally, Ghana consistently remains part of the three states in Africa with relative “freedom of speech and press freedom, with strong broadcast media in particular and radio, the medium with the greatest reach,” that’s according to the World Bank Group.⁵⁴⁶ Such a sustained stable political and democratic development of the country allows for a stable country in which businesses could thrive and importantly attract foreign investors. Not only that, but the constitutional guarantee⁵⁴⁷ of freedom of speech, press freedom and indeed freedom of religion also allows religious groups especially Christianity and Islam⁵⁴⁸ to gain public visibility and compete for adherents as stated earlier and as will be later discussed. Moreover, in the discussion of Christianity below, the fact will be established that these political developments and the economic part did receive and indeed still receive an indispensable contribution from religious groups especially the churches in Ghana. These political credentials set Ghana out as the pride of Africa in democratic terms. That does not, however, save it from the monstrous canker named as corruption which largely explains the level of poverty in the country despite the available material resources. For, economically, the country is considered a low middle-income country with a total GDP of 45.50 billion US Dollars⁵⁴⁹ with agriculture, partly mechanised, as one of the main contributors to the GDP, for it employs about half of the workforce. Even though the country is endowed with great reserves of natural resources like gold (that is why the colonial government named it Gold Coast in colonial times), diamond, crude oil, bauxite, manganese, timber, etc. and cash crops such as cocoa (Ghana and Ivory Coast are world leading producers of cocoa), cashew, etc., many Ghanaians are still under the poverty line: the 2013 estimates pegged it at twenty-four percent (24 %) of the population with youth unemployment forming about eleven percent (11 %) as at 2013. Taking together, this section provides a picture (albeit not exhaustive) of the political and economic spheres of Ghana within which Christians in Ghana negotiate on daily basis their faith in God through Jesus. And it is important

(if peaceful conduct of elections is the main litmus test for democracy) was put to the greatest test in the 2012 general elections when the then opposition NPP declined the outcome because it felt cheated. It took the case to the Supreme Court of Ghana for judgment and after several months of open court proceedings, the Supreme Court upheld the results of the election.  ‘Overview’, Text/HTML, World Bank, accessed 6 November 2017, http://www.worldbank. org/en/country/ghana/overview.  See Article 21, Clause 1, subsections a and c of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana already cited.  And even recently, groups from the traditional religions.  At the time of writing.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

111

to have this in mind as together with the socio-religious background it shapes the Christian context itself and by extension how people read holy scripture. And that is the point of the presentation of those two broad contextual factors in Ghana.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana Christianity in Ghana predates the Ghanaian state itself and it is also multifaced. This section will therefore discuss Christianity in Ghana generally and subsequently pay attention to the initially stated three major Christian streams. The coming of organised Christianity to Ghana dates back to the ninetieth century through the activities of European mission societies (mostly protestant).⁵⁵⁰ “Organised Christianity” is used consciously here to acknowledge the historical fact that before the ninetieth century, unsuccessful attempts were already made in the fiftieth century by “(…) Augustinian, Capuchin, and Dominican friars (…) to make converts in the vicinity of Portuguese castles on the Gold Coast.”⁵⁵¹ The first recorded attempt to introduce Christianity into Ghana dates back to 20 January 1482 when Portuguese explorers and traders arrived in a village on the West Coast of Ghana called Shama and set up a Cross and celebrated Holy Mass as the first of its kind in West Africa.⁵⁵² From this time until the arrival at the Gold Coast of the Basel Evangelical Mission Society whose mission work will set off organised Christianity in Ghana, there have been other attempts at introducing Christianity into Ghana. Examples of such attempts are: 1. in 1737, Christian Jacob Protten and Henrich Huckuff were sent on mission to Ghana (then, the Gold Coast) by the Moravian United Brethren Mission, without winning converts, 2. the Netherlands Reformed Mission also made missionary attempts in the Gold Coast by sending to Edina (present day Elmina) Jacobus Elisa Capitein. This mission also failed because Capitein was ostracised by the indigenous people and not able to win adult converts, 3. the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel (SPG) from England also attempted mission work in Ghana. It sent the Rev. Thomas Thomson (1708 – 1773) as a Chaplain to the Gold Coast from 1752 to 1756 upon the request  Cf. Gerrie ter Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus: A Survey of New Developments in Christianity in Ghana’, Exchange 23, no. 3 (December 1994): 222.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 42– 43.  Omenyo, 45.

112

3 The Ghanaian context

of the Royal Africa Company (RAC). Rev. Thomson could not gain sustained success in his mission work. Later, however, the SPG continued its mission work by sending back to Ghana Rev. Philip Quaque (1741– 1816) who was the lone survivor of three African boys sent by Rev. Thomson to England to be trained. He qualifies as “the first African to be trained by the SPG for the Anglican ministry.”⁵⁵³ Rev. Quaque like Rev. Thomson also failed even though he contributed immensely in the area of formal education in the Gold Coast which produced students that will later agitate for self-government in the independence struggle of Ghana.⁵⁵⁴ In addition, the success of Christianity in Ghana and indeed sub-Saharan Africa was not based on the sole work of European or Western missionaries; the colossal contribution of indigenous people was important to the entire process.⁵⁵⁵ Returning to Capitein of the Netherlands Reformed Mission, he was an exslave from the Gold Coast sent to the Netherlands and studied at the Leiden University in Holland in 1737 and later ordained by the Dutch Reformed Church as the first African to receive ordination by a Protestant church.⁵⁵⁶ His mission work in the Gold Coast is partly of interest in this study not because he translated the Decalogue (Ten Commandments) and Apostles’ Creed into Mfantse, but because he also translated the Lord’s Prayer into the same language. Later in Part III (i. e. chapter 4) below, mother-tongue Bible translation in Ghana as a form of reception will be considered using Capitein’s translation of the Lord’s Prayer as an example. After those initial failed attempts at introducing Christianity into Ghana,⁵⁵⁷ mission societies came from Europe. Their efforts (certainly together with local support) produced denominations that will dominate the Christian landscape in Ghana for many years until the emergence in the early and late twentieth cen-

 Omenyo, 50.  Omenyo, 48 – 52.  For details on this point, see Omenyo, 42.  Omenyo, 48 – 49. For further details on Capitein see John D. K. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana): The Historical, Linguistic, and Theological Settings of the Ga, Twi, Mfantse, and Ewe Bibles, History of Bible Translation 2 (United Kingdom: St. Jerome Publishing, 2011), 7– 12; John D. K. Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast: Two Case Studies’, Journal of African Christian Thought 13, no. 2 (December 2010): 34– 36; John D. K. Ekem, ‘Jacobus Capitein’s Translation of “The Lord’s Prayer” into Mfantse: An Example of Creative Mother Tongue Hermeneutics’, The Ghana Bulletin of Theology 2 (2007): 66 – 79.  Which indeed did prepare the ground for the later mission work in the ninetieth century.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

113

tury of the African instituted churches and the Pentecostal-Charismatic churches respectively. The historical development of Christianity in Ghana, therefore, allows for a (loose) categorisation of Christianity in Ghana into three⁵⁵⁸ streams. As already mentioned, they are, 1) the mainline or historic mission churches—the Christianity they (re)present is then termed as mainline or mission founded Christianity, 2) the African instituted/initiated/independent churches (AICs)—African independent or initiated or instituted Christianity and 3) the Pentecostal-Charismatic churches (PCCs)—Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity. Almost all the about seventy (70 %) Ghanaians said to be Christians is distributed among these three expressions of Christianity in the country. In the previous section it was noted that Christianity in Ghana contributes immensely to the political and economic developments of the country as the predominant religion. It is not only in these two sectors of the country, but also in the sectors of education, health and agriculture. It is worth noting that in all the political and economic vicissitudes of the country presented above, “Christians have either spoken out or prayed for peace.”⁵⁵⁹ For instance, “The few weeks before the 1992 and 1996 elections were the period most churches (particularly Pentecostals and Charismatics) held vigils to pray for peace in the country.”⁵⁶⁰ This phenomenon of national prayers during national elections continued beyond the 1990s even into the 2000s. For example, in 2012 a national prayer vigil dubbed “National All Believers All Night” took place in Accra, the capital of Ghana, convened by Archbishop Nicolas Duncan Williams of the Action Faith Ministries. In these night prayer vigils for the country, peace, stability, economic and social prosperity feature strongly as prayer requests. Moreover, political leaders are prayed for to make wise and progressive decisions just as prayers are made for the church to continue to have the freedom of worship in the country. Another aspect of the prayers that underly all the other prayer requests is the ‘warfare’ conducted against evil or the devil. Here the observation needs to be made that the occurrence of such events in itself is symptomatic of the worldview described above, that because God is the ultimate reality and can undo the works of the lower spiritual beings of evil, he is invoked in such gatherings albeit from a

 Some think of it as four streams by separating Pentecostal-Charismatic churches into (old) Pentecostal churches and neo-Pentecostal or Charismatic churches. See Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Anointing through the Screen’, 9.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 19. Cf. J. Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Pentecostalism in Africa’, in African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, SPCK International Study Guide 46 (London: SPCK, 2010), 66.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 19.

114

3 The Ghanaian context

Christian perspective to effect or change the course of physical and human sphere of the country for the better. In the next sub-section, when each of the three streams of Christianity are presented, references will be made to specific activities of some of the churches that capture in concrete terms their public engagement and role in the Ghanaian society. As already stated, Christianity predominates the religious space in Ghana. Its predominance could be seen in the public display of biblical and biblically related quotes mostly on shops, vehicles (both private and public ones), residential buildings, names of companies, etc. Going by the quote from Beal on reception above, these forms of biblical quotes are explicit, documentable cases of contemporary reception of the Bible and its cultural impact in Ghana. In relation to the predominance of the Christian faith in Ghana, Kahl⁵⁶¹ observes that, “Dass das Christentum in Ghana die verbreiteste Religion darstellt und dass es als solche das gesamte Leben der Gläubigen durchdringt, wird ersichtlich an Fahrzeugaufschriften mit christlichen Referenz (…).⁵⁶² In this work, and in relation to the biblical quotes, he references in a foot note the conclusion of J. Seebode (who ethnologically collected some of these quotes on vehicles in Ghana) that most of the quotes he collected referred to the power of God.⁵⁶³ Some of these collected quotes include, “In God we trust,” “Jesus is the answer,” “God the ultimate giver,” “God is good,” “God will provide,” etc.⁵⁶⁴ The point of interest here is that these quotes reflect in them the personal existential related interpretations of the Bible by the respective persons who assigned the quotes to their properties. Lastly, another important aspect of Christianity in Ghana is that all the churches consider evangelism as an important activity of church life⁵⁶⁵ such that it is common to see Christians openly preaching and evangelising in public places like in markets, in buses,⁵⁶⁶ in schools and university campuses, in neighbourhoods especially in the morning (in what is termed as “dawn-broadcasting”), etc. In what follows, the foregoing presentation will be extended by looking at the individual streams that constitute the Christianity in Ghana.

 He (for his Habilitation) carried out an extensive research on interpretation of the Bible in West Africa and its relevance for New Testament studies and drew his data from Ghana.  Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter, 249.  J. Seebode, “You can’t force there to be there if there is no there”. Fahrzeugaufschriften in Ghana, 1994, cited in Kahl, 249.  Kahl, 250 – 51. See also Gifford, African Christianity, 61, for quotes like, “I will make it in Jesus’ Name,” “King of Kings Electrical,” “The Lord is my Light Car Wash,” etc.  Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’.  Gifford, African Christianity, 61.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

115

3.4.1 Mission founded/mainline churches The mission founded/mainline⁵⁶⁷ churches⁵⁶⁸ constitute (from Figure 1 above) about eighteen percent (18 %) of the proportion of Christians in Ghana. They are churches that were set up by European mission societies in the ninetieth century. As earlier noted, initial attempts at gospel propagation started already in the pre-nineteenth and twentieth centuries. However, organised Christianity was achieved later by the works of mission societies like the Evangelical Missionary Society in Basel (Basel Mission).⁵⁶⁹ The first batch of Basel missionaries arrived in 1828 to what is today Accra (the capital of Ghana) by the invitation of and within the jurisdiction of the Danish government.⁵⁷⁰ The present-day Presbyterian Church of Ghana (PCG) is the enduring fruit of the Basel Mission. For this reason, the PCG will later be used to represent mainline Christianity in discussing the liturgical reception of the study text in Ghana. The Wesleyan Methodist Missionary Society (WMMS)⁵⁷¹ from England also arrived in Ghana in 1835. The present Methodist Church Ghana, a mainline church, could be attributed to its efforts. Omenyo⁵⁷² in his study stresses the local initiative and contribution to European mission work in Ghana when he discusses the work of the WMMS in Ghana: “The choice of Ghana as a mission field for the WMMS is one of the clearest example of the crucial role local initiative (…) played in missionary enterprise in Ghana.”⁵⁷³ He stresses this point because the WMMS came into Ghana as a response to an invitation by a local initiative which sort to study the Bible and to live accordingly. Even though they

 The fact that the Pentecostal-Charismatic churches now hold the greatest proportion of Christian population in Ghana raises questions on whether the label “mainline churches” used exclusively in relation to the mission founded churches is right. See Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’, 221.  There are various designations of this stream: mainline churches/Christianity, mission founded, historic mission churches/Christianity, etc. These various designations will be used interchangeably in this study.  For detailed discussion of the mission work of the Basel Mission, see Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 52– 56.  Robert T. Parsons, The Churches and Ghana Society 1918 – 1955: A Survey of the Work of Three Protestant Mission Societies and the African Churches Which They Established in Their Assistance to Societary Development (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963), 3.  For further discussion on the work of the WMMS in Ghana, see Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 57– 59.  Omenyo’s study has been referenced severally in this section because it presents a detailed research on the related subjects.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 57.

116

3 The Ghanaian context

(those behind the initiative) requested for Bibles, the WMMS, convinced by an English sailor, Captain Potter through whom the local initiative sent their request for Bibles, sent missionaries to Ghana.⁵⁷⁴ Another mission founded church is the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EP). The EP is the abiding fruit of the Bremen Mission whose missionaries first arrived in Ghana in 1847. They based their work mostly in Eweland (i. e. North-East of Ghana) setting up their first station in Peki.⁵⁷⁵ It is worth noting here that there are two EP churches in Ghana who trace their history to the work of the Bremen Mission. The initial single EP church experienced breakaways in the wake of the Charismatic revival movements in Ghana in the twentieth century. Then later in 1880, the Society of African Missions of the Roman Catholic Church set up the Roman Catholic Church in Ghana. As shown earlier, the earlier efforts to introduce Christianity in Ghana failed. This earlier initial attempt in the fiftieth century was from the Catholic Church. The 1880 missions were therefore a re-attempt by the Catholic missions to introduce Roman Catholicism into Ghana. The Roman Catholic Church in Ghana today is the single largest Christian denomination in the country.⁵⁷⁶ The other earlier pre-nineteenth century attempt at Gospel propagation in Ghana was in relation to the mission work of Rev. Thomson and his mentee Rev. Philip Quaque in the eightieth century whose labour sought to establish Anglicanism in Ghana. It was previously noted that they failed in their attempts even though they succeeded in the area of education. It is, however, important to add that “(…) an Anglican Chaplaincy that was funded by [a] committee of merchants continued.”⁵⁷⁷ The SPG revived its mission work again in Ghana in 1904 at which time there already existed four Anglican congregations in Ghana.⁵⁷⁸ The point of recounting this is to state that another mainline church that is listed under this subsection is the Anglican Church in Ghana whose history traces back to these missionary efforts just presented. Other mainline churches include the Seventh Day Adventists, the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, the Baptist Church, etc. By the early twentieth century, these mainline churches except the Seventh Day Adventists, came together to form a unified ecumenical body called the

 Omenyo, 57.  See Omenyo, 59 – 61., for further details on the work of the Bremen Mission in Ghana.  Omenyo, 36.  Omenyo, 50., cf. Paul Jenkins, ‘The Anglican Church in Ghana, 1905 – 1924 (Part One)’, Transactions of the Historical Society of Ghana 15, no. 1 (1974): 23.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 50.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

117

Christian Council of Ghana (CCG) in 1929.⁵⁷⁹ According to the information posted on its website,⁵⁸⁰ the Council has 26 member churches and three Christian organisations with a clearly defined vision: “To be the Triune God’s instrument for change in Ghana where the highest value is placed on Peace, Justice, Unity and Respect for the Dignity and Integrity of Creation.” In addition, “Membership of the C.C.G is open to all Churches and Ecumenical/Para-Church Organisations in Ghana.”⁵⁸¹ While the CCG represents largely the historic Protestant mission churches, the Roman Catholic Church is represented by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference (CBC) with both bodies having regular ecumenical relations. Gerrie ter Haar’s observation in 1994 about relations between the CCG and the CBC is still valid: “The Christian Council maintains a good working relationship with the Catholic Bishops’ Conference, whose work is coordinated by the National Catholic Secretariat (…).”⁵⁸² They have over the years often ecumenically teamed up in commenting on political, economic and social issues.⁵⁸³ For instance, in 1989, both bodies in a joint letter registered their unwillingness to comply with the PNDC Law 221 (announced on 14 June 1989) which required all churches to be registered with the then Ministry of Interior through which they will be accountable to government.⁵⁸⁴ Furthermore, they also successfully campaigned for Religion to be introduced into Ghana’s school curriculum (achieved by 1995).⁵⁸⁵ Additionally, the two ecclesiastical bodies actively participated in the public debate on democracy for Ghana in the lead up to the inauguration of the 1992 Constitution and the Fourth Republic. Their participation was through organising re-

 Five denominations founded it in 1929: African Methodist Episcopal (AME), Zion Church, English Church Mission (Anglican), Ewe Presbyterian Church (now Evangelical Presbyterian Church), Presbyterian Church of the Gold Coast (now Presbyterian Church of Ghana) and Wesleyan Methodist Church (now the Methodist Church Ghana). See Christian Council of Ghana, ‘History | Christian Council of Ghana’, accessed 15 May 2018, http://www.christiancouncilgh. org/Pages/History.php.  At the time of writing this section.  Christian Council of Ghana, ‘Become A Member’, Membership Procedure, accessed 15 September 2018, http://www.christiancouncilofghana.org/Pages/Become-A-Member.php.  Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’, 223.  Kwesi A. Dickson sheds great light on the active role of the church in Ghana in the efforts to restore democratic rule in Ghana. His article depicts the concerted ecumenical efforts of both the CCG and CBC in this regard. See Kwesi A. Dickson, ‘The Church and the Quest for Democracy in Ghana’, in The Christian Churches and the Democratisation of Africa, ed. Paul Gifford, Studies of Religion in Africa 12 (Leiden; New York; Köln: E. J. Brill, 1995), 262.  Gifford, African Christianity, 69. cf. Dickson, ‘The Church and the Quest for Democracy in Ghana’, 265.  Gifford, African Christianity, 69. See also Dickson, ‘The Church and the Quest for Democracy in Ghana’, 262.

118

3 The Ghanaian context

spective seminars and issuing joint memoranda to government in April 1991.⁵⁸⁶ To that extent, they function(ed) rightly as civil society organisations in their relations with government and the state.⁵⁸⁷ The relevance of the CCG is to be seen in its socio-political and economic engagement in the Ghanaian society in pursuit of its vision. Even though the CCG participates actively in the Ghanaian society in the areas of politics, economics, religion and social issues, as for e. g. it issues statements—on its own and sometimes jointly with the CBC as noted—in respect of political and economic policies of government and government in turn recognises it as a key stakeholder in the country, its socio-economic activeness is, however, much evidenced in the respective activities of its member churches. Therefore, the assessment of its socio-political and economic activeness will be done by looking at the socio-economic activities of some of its member churches. Most of its member churches are key sector players in health delivery, education, agriculture, etc. For instance, the PCG alone owns over one thousand five hundred (1,500) educational units comprising nurseries, primary and basic schools, senior high schools, vocational training centres, colleges of education (previously teacher training colleges⁵⁸⁸), nurses training colleges and a university (with over three campuses located in different cities in Ghana). It also owns about four hospitals including the Bawku Presbyterian Hospital, Presbyterian Health Services, Agogo and other forms of health centres such as primary health care centres, clinics, etc. In the area of agriculture, the PCG, through its Presby Agric Services, partners with government to alleviate poverty by providing farmers with agricultural services through its Agric Stations located especially in the northern parts of Ghana. This social engagement is not limited only to the PCG as same can be said of the Methodist Church Ghana, the Anglican Church, etc. The Roman Catholic Church is not exempted from this too. For according to Paul Gifford, “The Catholic Church has long been heavily involved in services of education and health, and increasingly in development and relief.”⁵⁸⁹ Part of its socioeconomic engagement, especially in the area of relief, is executed by the Catholic Relief Services in Ghana. With the PCG as an example, one can adduce the enormity of the social engagement of the church in Ghana. This is just one example from the group of churches termed here as historic mission/mainline churches.

 Dickson, ‘The Church and the Quest for Democracy in Ghana’, 262– 63.  Gifford, African Christianity, 109 – 10.  Indeed, it is stated that the PCG established the first teacher training college (i.e. the Presbyterian Training College, PTC in Akropong) in Ghana which at the time was the second in the whole of West Africa, the first being the Fourah Bay College in Sierra Leone.  Gifford, African Christianity, 65.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

119

When the other streams of Christianity are later discussed, one denomination (particularly from the PCC) will also be picked and its socio-economic contribution will be stated. In short, what is considered as mainline or mission founded churches in Ghana are those churches that “(…) have [their church] polity, ethos, liturgical practice and theological tradition handed down to them by their founding Western European Missionary Societies in the nineteenth century.”⁵⁹⁰ As will be expected, the mainline churches carried further the inherited church traditions and that meant that they will also face similar problems encountered by their founding mission societies, namely introducing a Christianity that failed to meet squarely the spiritual quests and religious sensibilities of Ghanaians because it failed to take the latter’s traditional worldview into account. According to Omenyo, “A more serious deficit that we find in inherited mainline Christianity is the official insensitivity to African worldview and spirituality.”⁵⁹¹ For instance, European styled liturgical traditions of the mainline churches initially disallowed drumming and dancing during worship services just as it forbade wearing of traditional garments to church. Omenyo records that, “Late Dr. Ephraim Amu⁵⁹² was banned from preaching at the local Presbyterian Church at Akropong Akuap[em] for wearing the traditional cloth to mount the pulpit to preach.”⁵⁹³ The disallowing of drumming and wearing of traditional apparels was justified as being associated with traditional religious practices which were dismissed as pagan and evil from which Christians had to disassociate themselves. One will, considering the foregoing, be fair to say that the mainline churches were partly not to blame because the founding missions did not also take the traditional conception of the universe and its constitution into account in the proclamation of the Christian gospel to the indigenes. Accordingly, Kwame Bediako argues that, “Looked at from this perspective [i. e. non-recognition of the traditional beliefs in the supernatural and its impact on human life], missionary activity never amounted to a genuine encounter, and the Christian communities [namely the mainline churches] that have resulted have not really known how to

 Cephas Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, Pneuma 16, no. 1 (1 January 1994): 176 – 77, https://doi.org/10.1163/157007494X00166.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 65.  A renowned early Ghanaian Composer, Musicologist and Teacher, 1899 – 1995.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 65.

120

3 The Ghanaian context

relate to their traditional culture in terms other than those of denunciation or separateness.”⁵⁹⁴ He stretches this point further by observing, The missionary enterprise of the nineteenth century did not see in African traditional religion and culture a partner for dialogue (…). The 1910 World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh concluded that African traditional religions, which it roundly described as Animism, probably contained no preparation for Christianity. (…) The Christian tradition as historically received through the missionary enterprise has, on the whole, been unable to sympathise with or relate to the spiritual realities of the traditional world-view. It is not so much as a case of unwillingness to relate to these realities, as of not having learnt to do so.⁵⁹⁵

While that is fair to say, one also acknowledges that at the handing over of church governance to these churches, even though Bediako asserts above that they have not learnt to relate to the traditional world-view, it was time for them to do precisely this—learn to dialogue with the surrounding religion and culture. Admittedly, they seem to have done and are doing this even if it came much later in the wake of the Charismatic renewal movements in the early and late twentieth century which produced new, vibrant streams of Christianity. However, those initial times of “not having learnt to do so” led to a mainline Christianity that was dull, spiritually dry and boring, only intellectually based which was certainly alien to the Ghanaian religious perception. The consequences of such Christianity were that, 1. “many otherwise loyal Ghanaian Presbyterians and Methodists [i. e. members of mainline Christianity] claim[ed] to find in these churches [i. e. the AICs] spiritual help which they have looked for in vain in the historical churches to which they officially belong.”⁵⁹⁶ 2. Others did not just visit the new streams of Christianity for “spiritual help,” but when they found it, they rather stayed there. In other words, mainline Christianity was losing membership to the new Christian movements. This point will be revisited when the impact of the new streams of Christianity on the historical mission churches are discussed. 3. Lastly, there were some members of mainline Christianity who belonged partly to their erstwhile traditional religions and partly to Christianity. Bediako describes them as “living in two worlds” neither belonging fully to any.⁵⁹⁷

 Kwame Bediako, Christianity in Africa: The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion, Trends in African Christianity (Akropong-Akwapem: Regnum Africa, 2014), 69.  Bediako, 69.  Bediako, 65.  Bediako, 68.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

121

In other words, there were members of mainline churches who felt that mission Christianity was not meeting squarely their religious needs. Consequently, when they encountered challenges, they reverted to their traditional beliefs by consulting traditional priests for help. Certainly, this had to be the case because within the primal understanding, religion was supposed to meet soteriological ends and if one’s religion was not demonstrating such ability, another religion had to be consulted. Surely, mainline Christianity’s response to the emergence of the AIC and PCC has resulted in the new reality that, today in Ghana, it has become commonplace to see Charismatic renewal phenomena such as prayer vigils, healing and deliverance services, prophesying, speaking in tongues and other manifestations of the Holy Spirit—features that initially distinguished AICs and PCCs—in mainline churches. Similarly, drumming, clapping and singing of local choruses during worship services are now part of contemporary liturgies of mainline churches. For example, in a normal Presbyterian liturgy for a Sunday worship service, the singing of hymns is done along aside singing of local and international choruses accompanied with drumming, clapping and delightful dancing. To this effect, PCG congregations, for example, often have both a Church Choir and a Praises Team as well as a Singing Band; all three music groups contributing to the musical needs of the church. As a result, “the distinctions between the historical churches, of missionary origin, and the independent or African instituted churches, [and Pentecostal-Charismatic churches] have since become less meaningful, as features which were once thought to be [exclusive] characteristic of the latter have been found to be shared also by the former.”⁵⁹⁸ Nevertheless, the lines between mission founded Christianity in Ghana and the later streams of Christianity are not completely blurred. For, compared to the other forms, mainline Christianity emphasises and pursues academic training and qualification of its agents. Ordained ministers of mainline churches (especially those into full time ministry) would usually spend not less than two years in the seminary pursuing theological education.⁵⁹⁹ In addition, mainline

 Bediako, 66.  In this regard, mention should be made here of one of the theological seminaries of mainline Christianity in Ghana, namely the Trinity Theological Seminary (TTS). It is an ecumenical theological tertiary institution, founded in 1942, that provides ministerial training for mainly but not limited to the five sponsoring churches which are the Methodist Church Ghana, the PCG, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, the Anglican Church and the A.M.E. Zion. Interestingly, some of the AICs and PCCs have their clergy also trained by the TTS. They are considered nonsponsoring churches.

122

3 The Ghanaian context

Christianity also distinguishes itself from the other streams through its liturgical traditions stated earlier. Even though it has been indicated that the liturgical traditions have been adjusted to incorporate Ghanaian content, it is still true to state that it is quite formal and orderly especially in Sunday worship services. Written, formal and orderly liturgy of mainline churches is hard to find in AICs and PCCs where mostly spontaneity is cherished. For instance, the Lord’s Prayer (the object of study) features prominently in the liturgies of mainline Christianity but hardly in that of Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity.⁶⁰⁰ By and large, mainline Christianity certainly laid the initial Christian foundation for the rise and continuation of the later ones which will be treated next taking first the AICs followed by the PCCs.

3.4.2 African instituted churches Partly against the background of the failure of mission churches to meet the spiritual quests and religious aspirations of Ghanaians, because of the initial neglect of the primal worldview in their praxis, Charismatic movements arose in the early twentieth century. Omenyo notes about five strands of Charismatic renewal movements in Ghana. The first two occurred between 1914 and 1937 and between 1930s and 1940s respectively. He ties the rise of the initial two strands to the outbreak of influenza after the First World War and the economic depression that hit Ghana in the 1940s. During these crisis times, Charismatic revival prayer groups were formed some of which later metamorphosed into churches⁶⁰¹ variously called “spiritual churches” or “African independent churches” or “African initiated/instituted churches” or simply “independent churches.” On the one hand, they are called spiritual churches because, according to C. G. Baëta, who conducted a dedicated study on this stream of Christianity published in 1962, the ‘spiritual’ is “intended to signify that, in their worship, the groups concerned engage in various activities which (by their own assertation) are either meant to invoke the Holy Spirit of God, or are to be interpreted as signs of his descent upon the worshipers.”⁶⁰² On the other hand, they are called “African independent churches” or “African initiated/instituted churches” because they

 For which reason, in Part IV of this study, through empirical data, reasons will be adduced for that.  Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, 169.  Christian Gonçalves Baëta, Prophetism in Ghana: A Study of Some ‘spiritual’ Churches, World Mission Studies (London: SCM Press, 1962), 1. See also, Thomas A. Oduro, Church of the Lord (Brotherhood): History, Challenges and Growth, 2nd ed. (Accra: SonLife Printing Press, 2016), 6.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

123

were founded and led by Africans without any Western missionary support as in the case of the mainline churches.⁶⁰³ African Instituted Churches is used in this study to represent these churches.⁶⁰⁴ Without delving much into the historical development of the AICs,⁶⁰⁵ it is noted that the Charismatic movements within which the early AICs emerged were led by African religious personages like Prophet William Wade Harris (1860 – 1929), a Liberian, who qualifies as the forerunner and others like John Swatson (c.1855 – c.1925) and Samson Oppong (c.1884– 1965)⁶⁰⁶ both of whom were Ghanaians. These prophets did not intend to set up churches from the beginning as it is evident in the case of Prophet Harris whose activities set rolling the early Charismatic renewal movement. It is recorded that he preached and baptised people and asked them to join existing mainline churches. Omenyo, therefore, explains the relevance of the activities of Prophet Harris and the other prophets as follows, The activities of these African prophets [i. e. Prophet Harris, Swatson and Oppong] resulted in an unprecedented mass movement of people into the mainline churches in Ghana and elsewhere. The relevance of the activities of these prophets lies in the fact that, although they had their calls quite independently of any Western mission, yet they identified with the mainline churches and sought to operate in concert with [them]. Furthermore, the activities of the prophets brought about renewal within the churches in which they were allowed to exercise their prophetic ministries.⁶⁰⁷

One of the AICs which emerged from the activities of these prophets is the Twelve Apostles Church, the first of the AICs in Ghana, which was established in 1914 through the preaching activities of Prophet Harris in the Western Region of Ghana.⁶⁰⁸ Most other AICs were, however, established by former members of mainline churches who because of one misunderstanding or the other that they had with leadership in respect of their Charismatic persuasions, broke away to form their own churches. According to Omenyo, “The AICs were mainly

 See Oduro, Church of the Lord (Brotherhood): History, Challenges and Growth, 2– 3.  In this study, whenever AICs is used, it means African Instituted Churches. But when AIC is used, it either, depending on the context, means, African Instituted Christianity or an African Instituted Church.  C. B. Baëta and Cephas Omenyo, both of whose works have already been cited here, have done this job already.  Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 67– 71. See these pages also for a detailed discussion ofn these three religious figures and their activities.  Omenyo, 67.  Omenyo, 73.

124

3 The Ghanaian context

founded by former members of the mainline churches who broke away from their mother churches.”⁶⁰⁹ Aside the Twelve Apostles Church, some other AICs in Ghana are, the Musama Disco Christo Church, the Saviour Church, the Apostles’ Revelation Society, the Eternal Sacred Order of Cherubim and Seraphim Society, Aladura (Church of the Lord), African Faith Tabernacle Congregation, etc.⁶¹⁰ Table 3: AICs and mainline churches from which their founders emerged AIC

Founder

Mother Church

Church of the Twelve Apostles Musama Disco Christo Church The Saviour Church The Apostolic Revelation Society

– Joseph Egyanka Appiah Samuel Brako Charles Kobla Nutomuli Wovenu Samuel Dankwa

– Methodist Church Ghana Methodist Church Ghana Evangelical Presbyterian Church Methodist Church Ghana

Osamadi (Church of Light)

They arose mainly because of failure of the mainline churches to meet the religious quests of Ghanaians, so that the AICs were by their religious ethos seen as filling the gap in Christianity in Ghana by expressing the Christian faith within the traditional worldview which could easily be related and responded to by Ghanaians.⁶¹¹ Bediako on his part is convinced that the emergence of the AICs was part of “the evident implications” of translating the Christian scriptures into the Ghanaian vernaculars. For the translation of the scriptures into the vernaculars allowed the local people to hear the Word of God in their own language and to express their response to it in their own language. It further allowed them to bring their own questions and problems to the Bible and take from it “what they would believe to be its answers [and solutions] to their questions [and problems].”⁶¹² Similarly, Kahl makes the case that the rise of the AICs owes also to the translation of the Scriptures into the mother-tongues. For him, this marked a turning point when Africans begun to interpret the Bible as they understood it and as they wanted to understand it.⁶¹³ This point of Bediako and Kahl about the scriptures in the vernaculars is important for this present study and will

 Cf. Omenyo, 73.  Omenyo, 73.  Cf. Omenyo, 74; Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, 177.  Bediako, Christianity in Africa: The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion, 59 – 63. Emphasis mine.  Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter, 212– 14.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

125

therefore be revisited, for they (i. e. the AICs and by extension Ghanaian readers of the scriptures) taking from the Bible what they “would believe to be its answers to their questions” and understanding it as they want(ed) to is indicative of how they read and interpret the scriptures which is central to reception studies and indeed the current task here in relation to the Lord’s Prayer. That noted, the discussion continues by considering the nature of AICs which also depicts how different they are especially from mainline churches and Pentecostal-Charismatic churches (PCCs). Omenyo describes the AICs as exhibiting “revivalist tendencies” and emphasising “faith healing.”⁶¹⁴ Their conduct of faith healing involves rituals such as “fasting,” “anointing with oil,” “ritual bathing,” “drinking of blessed water” and application of physical elements on patients.⁶¹⁵ AICs also engage in exorcism of evil spirits and curing witches who confess to be so. Omenyo observes further that, During services, most AICs burn pleasant-smelling incense and candles. Footwear is not allowed in the chapels of the churches. Leaders (…) have special dresses usually long white or coloured gown with girdles. Most of the churches have sacred places, sacred objects and sacred dresses. They generally observe food taboos (usually abstinence from alcoholic drinks and tobacco, eating pork, etc.) and other ritual taboos such as not engaging in sex in the night prior to a declared fasting and prayer day.⁶¹⁶

Their worship is also described as being vibrant, expressive, full of lively music and allowing for the manifestation of gifts of the Holy Spirit.⁶¹⁷ This description is given in relation to the mainline churches whose services at the time were dull and boring without drumming. But as noted above, in contemporary Ghana, worship services in mainline churches also qualify, in most part, for these descriptions. Baëta’s quote above makes reference to the AICs demonstrating signs that indicate the Spirit’s descent on them. He describes these signs as including, “rhythmic swaying of the body, usually with stamping to repetitive music (both vocal and instrumental, particularly percussion), hand-clapping, ejaculations, poignant cries and prayers, dancing, leaping, and various motor reactions expressive of intense religious emotion; prophesying, ‘speaking with tongues’ falling into trances, relating dreams and visions, (…).”⁶¹⁸

    

Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 73. Omenyo, 74. Omenyo, 74. Omenyo, 73; Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, 169. Baëta, Prophetism in Ghana, 1.

126

3 The Ghanaian context

Taking together, the religious ethos of the AICs described above carry semblance of that of traditional religions such that their activities directly met the religious aspirations of Ghanaians because they are undergirded by the Ghanaian traditional worldview as explained above. They also (re)presented right from the beginning a distinct African response to the Christian Gospel in African terms. Bediako expresses this point aptly: “The significance of [the AICs], therefore, has been that they pointed to the direction in which broad sections of African Christianity were moving, and so they testified to the existence of some generalised trends in the African response to the Christian faith in African terms.”⁶¹⁹ Despite this, the rise of the Pentecostal-Charismatic churches lent a big blow to the growth of the AICs as Gifford’s study has revealed: their rise led to the decline in membership of the AICs.⁶²⁰ In relation to the PCCs, the religious ethos of the AICs is however similar. Nonetheless, the two streams differ in some respects. On the difference, Gerrie ter Haar observes that it lies in the AICs not solely focusing on the Word (i. e. the Bible), but combining both NT and OT beliefs with some traditional African beliefs (e. g. ancestors and Polygamy).⁶²¹

3.4.3 Pentecostal-Charismatic churches As initially mentioned, the PCC is currently said to be the most influential stream of Christianity in Ghana by the numbers it draws. There are two forms within PCC that require differentiation: that is the Old or Classical Pentecostals and the neo-Pentecostals or the Charismatics. Among the Classical Pentecostals, the Assemblies of God is first to arrive in Ghana from the USA in 1931 followed in 1937 by the Apostolic Church (set up through the Scottish mission of the Apostolic Church of Bradford in England). From the Apostolic Church emerged two other Classical Pentecostal churches, namely the Christ Apostolic Church and the Church of Pentecost (previously called the Gold Coast Apostolic Church).⁶²² These four churches—Assemblies of God, Church of Pentecost, Apostolic Church and Christ Apostolic Church—represent the earliest examples of Classical Pentecostal churches. After these Old Pentecostal churches emerged the neo-Pentecostals or Charismatic⁶²³ churches out of the evangelical movement of the 1960s in     

Bediako, Christianity in Africa: The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion, 66. Emphasis added. Gifford, African Christianity, 95. Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’. Haar, 225. From charismata, i. e. gifts of grace.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

127

Ghana. They are “churches which do not differ fundamentally with the old Pentecostal churches in matters of theology, doctrinal issues or tenets of belief, although their origin is somewhat different.”⁶²⁴ For Asamoah-Gyadu, a distinguishing mark between them is to be seen in each one’s attitude towards materialism: while the former (i. e. Old Pentecostals) tended to retreat from it as a hindrance to the kingdom of God and spirituality, the latter saw (sees) it as divine blessings for Christian commitment and faithfulness in paying tithes and offerings.⁶²⁵ They started as a movement of individuals from different denominations with a focus on Bible study. They also initially targeted schools and universities just as, understandably, their first audience was elite before they later metamorphosed into a mass movement. Their Pentecostal outlook was largely influenced by the Charismatic movement in the USA in the 1970s. In respect of the American influence, for instance, Gifford’s study in 1994 of some leaders within the Charismatic movement in Ghana reveals that almost all of them were influenced or inspired by one American Charismatic preacher or the other, including Billy Graham, Lester Sumrall, Kenneth Hagin, Morris Cerullo, T. L. Osborn, Kenneth Copeland, A. A. Allen, etc.⁶²⁶ Moreover, their emphasis on the Holy Spirit baptism and speaking in tongues marks them out. And even though they began as Bible study groups as indicated, some of them metamorphosed into churches in the late 1970s.⁶²⁷ A possible reason for their explosive emergence is said to be the hunger situation in 1983 resulting from the economic depression of the time. The explosive rise of the movement, therefore, is assumed to reflect an attempt by some Ghanaians, amidst the socio-economic difficulties occasioned by the economic depression, to find orientation in life⁶²⁸ which the movement seemed to provide at the time. Examples of the neo-Pentecostal or Charismatic churches include, Christian Action Faith Ministries (also Action Chapel International) led by Archbishop Nicolas Duncan-Williams, Light House Chapel International, led by Bishop Dag Heyward Mills, Fountain Gate Chapel, led by Rev. Eastwood Anaba, etc. Asamoah-Gyadu observes that, “many of these churches [i. e. the Charismatic churches which in the context of this quote he also terms as ‘New Pentecostal churches’] have developed mega-sized congregations; they are led by Charismatic personalities who preach motivational messages and take modern approaches

 Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’, 226.  Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Pentecostalism in Africa’, 62.  Paul Gifford, ‘Ghana’s Charismatic Churches’, Journal of Religion in Africa 24, no. 3 (1994): 241– 65, https://doi.org/10.2307/1581301. See also, Gifford, African Christianity, 102– 3.  Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’, 227.  Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter, 218 – 19.

128

3 The Ghanaian context

to worship; they appeal greatly to upwardly mobile young Christians who are disenchanted with the denominationalism and clericalism of the past.”⁶²⁹ It is important for clarity purposes to put these two strands of Christianity which fall under the umbrella category of Pentecostalism into a historical context. For Omenyo, The root of Pentecostalism in Ghana is traced to the Faith Tabernacle Church, later known as Christ Apostolic Church. Mr. Peter Anim, the founder, who was later known as Apostle Anim, is generally regarded as the father of Pentecostalism in Ghana. Abamfo Atiemo [1993] establishes the fact that five years prior to the advent in Ghana of the first Pentecostal missionary from Europe (…), some Ghanaians including Apostle Anim experienced the baptism in the Holy Spirit.⁶³⁰

From Omenyo’s account, Pentecostalism seems to have had an indigenous root which was later boosted by its international contact. For he later accounts that, “Apostle Anim’s movement later linked up with the Apostolic Church of Bradford, England, which sent down a missionary.”⁶³¹ This explains further the point already made above about the arrival of the Apostolic Church in 1937 in Ghana whose activities produced the two other Pentecostal churches. Moreover, the said missionary in the foregoing quote from Omenyo is Mr. Mckeown (and later his wife). The point here is that the Classical Pentecostals emerged as part of the results of the first of the five strands⁶³² of Charismatic renewal movement in Ghana in the early twentieth century. Charismatic movements in the 1960s and 1970s produced nondenominational fellowships such as the Ghana Evangelical Society (GES), National Evangelistic Association (NEA), Youth Ambassadors for Christ Association (YAFCA), the Hour of Visitation Choir and Evangelistic Association (HOVCEA), Scripture Union (SU), and University Christian Fellowships (UCFs) which operated mainly in tertiary institutions in Ghana.⁶³³ The movements also produced numerous young Christians with college and university backgrounds. They lost interest in especially the mainline churches (what, by implication, Asamoah-Gyadu in the quote above termed as “denominationalism and clericalism of the past”) and became vibrant itinerant preachers and Bible teachers. Within these revival times (i. e. 1960s and 1970s), American evangelists visited Ghana preaching, mainly in English, in public radio and television stations. The itinerant literate     

Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 10. Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, 170. Omenyo, 170. The first two were indicated above. Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, 171.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

129

young preachers were thus influenced. Being young and preferring the English language as a medium of preaching, they found little appeal in the existing Classical Pentecostal churches, because even though they (i. e. the Classical Pentecostal churches) had youthful membership, their level of education in comparison was low. “Therefore, these young people who could fit neither into the mainline churches [nor] into the classical Pentecostal churches,” Omenyo explains, “started their own fellowships that eventually developed into Charismatic churches/ministries.”⁶³⁴ From this historical sketch then, one can now clearly appreciate the relationship between the two Pentecostals and especially why the Charismatics were (and are still) more English and urban based. Indeed, it is right to state in light of contemporary state of affairs that some of them have established their branches in rural Ghana too just as some also translate their services into mother-tongues. The question, that notwithstanding, is what differentiates Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity, from the mainline/mission founded Christianity already presented above? In general, Pentecostalism—both classical and neo-Pentecostals— emphasises the need for every believer to experience the baptism of the Holy Spirit with an initial evidence of speaking in tongues (termed as the “doctrine of initial evidence”) ⁶³⁵ and the manifestations of other spiritual gifts (the charismata) in their lives, the centrality of the Bible as the Word of God, healing, deliverance, prayers, etc. This stream largely represents a renewal of Christianity which was perceived as dry, dull and empty in the mission founded churches. Its emergence as a unique expression of Christianity in Ghana (and Africa as a whole) is explained by Asamoah-Gyadu as due to the neglect of the African worldview of mystical causality and non-integration of Charismatic renewal phenomena in worship by the mainline churches.⁶³⁶ In another study on the same subject, Asamoah-Gyadu adds that Pentecostalism emerged in Africa (and Ghana) because mainline Protestant churches assumed intellectual and liberal approaches to the Bible thereby abandoning the “experiential elements of Christianity.”⁶³⁷ Obviously, the “experiential elements of Christianity” is the same as the “Charismatic renewal phenomena” in his previous study. One observes here that the explanation to their rise is like that of the AICs: because of the dry, dull and empty Christianity of the mainline churches and

   

Omenyo, 171– 72. Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 50. Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Anointing through the Screen’, 9. Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 2.

130

3 The Ghanaian context

their neglect of the traditional worldview. One also observes that the PentecostalCharismatics’ emphasis on the Holy Spirit in their Christian praxis is analogous to the AICs’ who, as seen in the quote from Baeta’s study, exhibit signs in their worship to indicate the Spirit’s presence among them. That is the more reason why they were called Spiritual churches, in Ghanaian parlance, sumsum sore (in Akan) and Mumu Solemo (in Ga); literally, ‘Holy Spirit churches’.⁶³⁸ The PCCs, however, differentiate themselves from the AICs by putting aside all forms of religio-cultural practices which they consider as against the Scriptures such as pouring libation, polygamy, etc.⁶³⁹ Even though the movement only started recently, it has nonetheless become the dominant stream of Christianity in the country. Indeed, according to Haar, “Pentecostalism, diverse though it may be, is by far the most important religious trend in Ghana at present, as it is in many other countries in Africa.”⁶⁴⁰ Why? Asamoah-Gyadu again suggests that their massive following and their great visibility are due to their oral theological forms and their easy adaptability.⁶⁴¹ In a later study, he elaborates in respect of this question that the emphasis on personal transformation through the Holy Spirit, the insistence on the experience of the Holy Spirit with specific manifestations and the interventionist theology manifested in healing, deliverance and prayers for ‘breakthrough’ by the Pentecostal-Charismatic churches make them a religion of choice for many people in [Ghana] and in the non-Western world.⁶⁴² The primal worldview explained above undergirds this interventionist theology which also partly explains their dominance. Kahl equally observes this point and states, “One of the main reasons for the success of Pentecostalism in the sub-region [i. e. West Africa, Ghana inclusive] is precisely its ability to connect to the traditional knowledge of the spirit world.”⁶⁴³ In a whole, one realises that Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Ghana is an experiential Christianity due to its affirmation and conscious promotion of the experience of the Spirit of God both at the individual and corporate

 Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 73.  Kahl, Jesus als Lebensretter, 217– 18.  Haar, ‘Standing Up for Jesus’, 225.  Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Anointing through the Screen’, 9.  Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 6.  Kahl, ‘Jesus Power Super Power-Productive Friction in Intercultural Hermeneutics: A German Perspective’, 90.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

131

levels. And it is in this that this stream of Christianity largely distinguishes itself from the rest.⁶⁴⁴ A visible evidence of this experiential character of Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Ghana (and Africa) is prayer.⁶⁴⁵ Supposed to be “original, long, sustained and spontaneous,” prayers—done in the name of Jesus Christ and enabled by the Holy Spirit—in Pentecostal-Charismatic understanding have performative powers: they are able to invoke the supernatural to destroy the powers of evil and unlock the flow of the anointing of the Holy Spirit.⁶⁴⁶ In other words, prayers are aimed at attracting God’s intervention against situations believed to be caused by the devil.⁶⁴⁷ Moreover, seen as being able to destroy evil powers, prayers in this stream of Christianity in Ghana—better understood in contexts such as live worship, prayer vigils, revival services, evangelistic crusades—is further conceived as “spiritual warfare” (with Eph 6:12 at the background) in which the main opponent is the devil.⁶⁴⁸ Consequently, in much of the prayer meetings (usually led by Charismatic persons) prayers are directed at spiritual evil entities (such as witches, demons, etc.) believed to deprive their victims of good health, wealth, wellbeing and human progress by possessing and oppressing them.⁶⁴⁹ Since travelling abroad especially to Western countries in the minds of some Ghanaians is “an open door [to] material prosperity” – even if this, in reality, is far from true—one finds it not surprising that issues of visa acquisition and travel abroad are also central to such prayer meetings.⁶⁵⁰ Because of this understanding of prayers as having “performative power,” churches and in some cases individuals within this Christianity have set up what is called ‘Prayer Camps’  Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 5. Because they take the experience of the Spirit very seriously, he terms this stream of Christianity as, “pneumatic Christianity.”  Asamoah-Gyadu, 41.  Asamoah-Gyadu, 35, 40.  Asamoah-Gyadu, 56. For this reason, he considers Pentecostal-Charismatic prayers as being interventionist and imprecatory.  Asamoah-Gyadu, 36 – 37.  Asamoah-Gyadu, 44. Eric Nana Osei-Akoto has done a study in which he indicates a continuity between the pre-Christian nature and content of Akan traditional prayers and contemporary Christian prayers, exemplified most especially in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity. He underscores there the point that the imprecatory nature of contemporary Ghanaian Christian prayers and prayers done to ward off evil and secure the good life traces back to pre-Christian understanding and practice of prayers which were addressed to deities/divinities, ancestors and nature spirits among the Akan. See Eric N. Osei-Akoto, ‘God “Has Not Left Himself without Witness…”: Evidences of the Witness of God in the Akan Pre-Christian Heritage of Prayer’, Journal of African Christian Thought 20, no. 1 (June 2017): 49 – 56.  Cf. Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 47.

132

3 The Ghanaian context

which Asamoah-Gyadu has described as supernatural intervention centres to tackle issues of ill health, existential concerns, fears, anxieties, insecurities, etc.⁶⁵¹ Related to the prayer feature is the phenomenon of deliverance that has also gained roots and popularity within this stream. Gifford, observing this phenomenon as part of his study of Christianity in Ghana, describes the understanding behind it as follows: “The basic idea of deliverance is that a Christian’s progress and advance can be blocked by demons who maintain some power over him[/ her], despite his or her coming into Christ.”⁶⁵² The demons, according to the deliverance theology, must be located, bound and exorcised from their victim and that usually by an anointed ‘Man of God.’⁶⁵³ The process involved is what is termed as deliverance. Deliverance activities also take place in prayer camps as just stated and are aimed at issues of ill health, existential concerns, fears, anxieties, insecurities, etc. Mention has shortly been made of “anointing” of the Holy Spirit. This is a key expression, according to Asamoah-Gyadu, in [Pentecostal‐]Charismatic Christian discourse. It “refers to the ‘empowering presence of God’ that makes things happen. (…) It is the power of God in action. Symbolically, the anointing may be obtained by the application of olive oil accompanying a touch of one who is full of the anointing him/herself.”⁶⁵⁴ Indeed, Pentecostal-Charismatic leaders are expected to manifest an anointing as part of the legitimating factors of their ministries. It is worth noting here that the belief in evil spirits who hinder human flourishing and against whom prayers have to be offered (to God) is a manifestation of the Ghanaian worldview and ontology that were discussed above, but this time reworked through the Christian faith.⁶⁵⁵ Moreover, one could posit here that other issues—wealth, good health, marriage, job, promotion, etc.—that also form the agenda of prayer meetings in Pentecostalism in Ghana are largely socio-economic issues and therefore could be deemed as partly being influenced by the low level of economic development in the country described above. Another explanation is that, as earlier noted, the traditional worldview also understood religion as meeting socio-economic ends for which reason those who turn to Christianity also expect the Christian God to meet such needs. Taking together,

 Asamoah-Gyadu, 51.  Gifford, African Christianity, 97.  Gifford, 97. See pp. 97– 109 of his work for a detailed discussion on this phenomenon which still holds true today and even to be found in mission founded churches too.  Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Anointing through the Screen’, 22.  See Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 44 who acknowledges this background to Pentecostal-Charismatic prayers.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

133

one now understands, as earlier stated, why this later stream of Christianity has become dominant and influential in Ghana and much of Africa: it consciously, in its biblical appropriation, addresses the Ghanaian worldview and the daily socio-economic challenges of many Ghanaians. This observation also affirms the initial postulation that worldviews and socio-religious, economic (and political) factors could affect the reception of biblical texts in a given context. The tendency to interpret the Bible from a socio-economic standpoint of the reader partly explains the rise of another distinguishing mark of PentecostalCharismatic Christianity in Ghana called prosperity gospel which is to be found also in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in other parts of Africa and beyond. Even though the popularity of the prosperity gospel phenomenon in this stream of Christianity has been the result of the phenomenal influence of televangelists in North America, Emmanuel Anim has argued that the North American influence is not the initiator of the phenomenon but only served as a catalyst to it.⁶⁵⁶ For him, its origin could be traced to the understanding of prosperity within the primal imagination. In other words, within Ghanaian cosmology, there already existed the belief in prosperity, understood in terms of wealth, longevity and fertility (in relation to procreation), which was mediated through the ancestors and deities with Onyame as the ultimate source.⁶⁵⁷ Therefore, the Charismatic preaching of prosperity is only the Christian expression and fulfilment of this primal desire for prosperity among Ghanaians. To that extent, the North American influence was not an importation of something new into the Ghanaian Charismatic setting, but a reinforcement of an already existing local phenomenon.⁶⁵⁸ Another feature of PCC is its adaptability as earlier stated. Its adaptability is clearly seen in its immediate appropriation of the mass media to make its presence more conspicuous in the public space.⁶⁵⁹ This is a more recent phenomenon within Christianity in Ghana especially after the government lifted restrictions on the public media in the 1990s. It is, however, important to note that not only the

 Emmanuel Anim, ‘Prosperity Gospel in Ghana and the Primal Imagination’, Trinity Journal of Theology 17, no. 2 (July 2009): 31.  Anim, 31– 34.  For further discussion on how primal imagination/worldview in Ghana has influenced the preaching of Prosperity Gospel in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Ghana, see Anim, 30 – 42.  Paul Gifford already observed in the late 1990s this distinguishing mark of the PCCs: “This new sector of Christianity [i. e. the neo-Pentecostals in Ghana] is distinguished for its media awareness and its use of technology. The first thing a new church will save for is its public address system,” Gifford, African Christianity, 90 – 91.

134

3 The Ghanaian context

Pentecostal-Charismatics, but the mainline churches also have presence in the media. That notwithstanding, it is observed that about ninety percent (90 %) of televised Christianity in the country belongs to the Pentecostal-Charismatic churches.⁶⁶⁰ In fact, some of them own TV channels and Radio stations. Not only that, most of them also have media departments as part of their ecclesiastical establishment which ensure effective use of the mass media. Moreover, with the advent of social media, the PCCs have established their presence on them having ministry and in some cases personality accounts of their main leaders on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc. For example, at the time of writing, checks on Facebook showed that Archbishop Duncan-Williams of the Action Faith Ministries has a personality Facebook page followed by over a million Facebook users. At the same time, his ministry, Action Chapel International also has its own Facebook account. For Gifford, the PCCs use the media consciously to “enhance the reputation of church leaders and to spread their ideas.”⁶⁶¹ Furthermore, an important aspect of PCCs which is directly of interest to this study is that the Lord’s Prayer hardly appear in their liturgies like it does in mainline churches. It would be to the credit of this study, therefore, to attempt an explanation as to why and as already indicated this will be treated in Part IV (i.e. chapter 5) below. In terms of representation, just as the Christian Council of Ghana is the umbrella ecumenical body of the mainline churches, the Ghana Pentecostal and Charismatic Council (GPCC) is the representative body of the PCCs. Information posted on its official website describes it as follows, The Ghana Pentecostal and Charismatic Council (GPCC) is a Faith Based Organisation and the umbrella body of over 200 Pentecostal and Charismatic Christian church denominations and para-church organisations in Ghana, established since 1969 but registered and recognised as a legal entity in 1971 to pursue the unity of the body of Christ, to propagate the gospel and to meet the spiritual and socio-economic needs of its members and Ghanaians in general. Representing over 28 % of the Christian Community in Ghana (2010 PHC), we are the largest Church Council in Ghana in terms of population and denomination members (…). We work with other sister church councils and partners to undertake a number of development initiatives in Ghana (…).⁶⁶²

The “other sister church councils” could certainly be the CCG and Catholic Bishops’ Conference. Moreover, one sees in this description the aspect of meeting

 Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘Anointing through the Screen’, 11.  Gifford, ‘Ghana’s Charismatic Churches’, 256.  Ghana Pentecostal and Charismatic Council, ‘History and Background | GPCC’, accessed 19 September 2018, https://gpccghana.org/history-and-background/. Emphasis mine.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

135

socio-economic needs which in effect is fulfilled through the social engagements of its individual members in the Ghanaian society. Accordingly, just as it was done in the discussion of the mainline churches, the same will be done here too by picking, this time, two Pentecostal-Charismatic churches (one from the classical and the other from the neo-Pentecostal) and presenting some socioeconomic activities they undertake. The Church of Pentecost (CoP) is chosen to represent the classical Pentecostals. The CoP through its Pentecost Health Services (PHS) has a healthcare policy that advocates for disease prevention, health promotion, rehabilitation and excellent curative care. It “has one Hospital (Pentecost Hospital at Madina, Accra), seven Clinics (…). The Church of Pentecost Hospital and Clinics are established to provide affordable and quality health care to all persons, especially the poor and the marginalized. They serve predominantly the poor communities.”⁶⁶³ Like the mainline churches, the CoP also contributes to the education sector in Ghana as it “currently manages over 80 Basic Schools, 2 Senior High Schools at Koforidua and Kumasi, 3 School Complexes at Goaso (Brong-Ahafo Region), Gbawe (Accra), and Asante Mampong (Ashanti Region) and a University at Sowutuom, Accra.”⁶⁶⁴ For the neo-Pentecostals, the Action Chapel International (ACI) is picked. The ACI’s main institution through which it channels its socio-economic contribution is the Compassion in Action (CIA). Through the CIA, the ACI operates a Drug Rehab Centre in Prampram⁶⁶⁵ which helps to rehabilitate drug addicts and alcoholics and reintegrate them into community life. The CIA also operates an orphanage called the Basco Children’s Home which houses about 200 orphans and has both Primary and Junior high schools on its premise. Moreover, it supports underprivileged families who cannot afford to finance their children’s education. In addition, it has undertaken other community development projects such as providing bore holes in some villages in Ghana that give them access to potable water. The enormous impact of such a project can only be appreciated when one realises that there are still rural communities in Ghana without access to potable water and rather depend on streams, rivers, dams whose water is hardly potable. Another community project of the CIA is support for ‘schools under trees’ in some villages in Ghana. These are schools who conduct teaching and learning under trees instead of in usual constructed classroom buildings. In  Pentecost Health Services, ‘Pentecost Health Services | The Church of Pentecost’, accessed 19 September 2018, http://www.thecophq.org/index.php/pentecost-health-services/.  Pentecost Schools, ‘Pentecost Schools | The Church of Pentecost’, accessed 19 September 2018, http://www.thecophq.org/index.php/pentecost-schools/.  About 20 km from Accra, the nation’s capital.

136

3 The Ghanaian context

the context of CIA’s support, they are provided with school materials and in some cases school buildings. In summary, it can also be seen here how much socio-economically engaged Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Ghana is. By extension, it is further observable that Christianity in Ghana is not confined only to church buildings and cathedrals in which worship takes place, but also it is actively involved in the Ghanaian society socio-economically.

3.4.4 Influence(s) of AIC and Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity on mainline Christianity From the foregoing discussions, an incontrovertible factor for the emergence of the two later streams of Christianity is, summarily stated, the failure of mainline Christianity to present a Christianity that met the religious aspirations of Ghanaians by taking their traditional worldviews seriously. Consequently, as will be expected, their rise wielded a tremendous impact on mainline Christianity which was noted above. This impact is dynamic and will, for the sake of discussion purposes, be presented in terms of negative and positive impacts. First the negative aspects. 1. As earlier stated, both the AICs and the PCCs emerged within different strands of Charismatic renewal movements in response mainly to the failure of mainline Christianity. The AICs and the PCCs appeared attractive to many Ghanaian Christians so much so that many of them left their erstwhile mainline denominations and joined these new movements. Bediako observed this phenomenon noting that, “(…) a good number of those in the ‘spiritual’ churches are ex-Presbyterians, ex-Methodists, ex-Anglicans and ex-Roman Catholics.”⁶⁶⁶ For those who did not exit completely, they frequented the worship activities of these new churches to satisfy their spiritual ‘hunger’ which their original, mainline churches could not satisfy. In this light, Asamoah-Gyadu relates that, “(…) a considerable number of the membership of historic mission denominations did also maintain allegiance to their mother churches for Sundays. During the rest of the week, however, the same members went in search of Christian spirituality [in the new churches] that made sense in a precarious African environment with its belief in malevolent forces thought able to harm human health and impede progress.”⁶⁶⁷

 Bediako, Christianity in Africa, 68.  Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 12.

3.4 Christianity in Ghana

2.

3.

    

137

Moreover, some of the AICs were set up by former members of mainline churches⁶⁶⁸ and some recent Charismatic church leaders in Ghana were also previously members of mainline churches like the Methodist Church, the PCG, etc. Therefore, Omenyo declares, “(…) most founders and leaders of independent Charismatic churches in Ghana have a rich background in the mainline churches.”⁶⁶⁹ For example, Rev. Lawrence Tetteh of the World Miracle Outreach has a Methodist background, Dr. Mensa Otabil of the International Central Gospel Church has an Anglican background, Rev. Charles Agyinasare of Perez Chapel International is of a Catholic background, etc. The combined point of 1) and 2) is that mainline churches lost a great deal of members to the AICs and PCCs. In addition, the emergence of the AICs and the PCCs also generated conflicts and schisms in mainline churches.⁶⁷⁰ For the Charismatic and Charismatic renewal tendencies exhibited by those who later formed these new churches could not initially be accommodated by the mainline churches. Consequently, some of the mainline churches like the Evangelical Presbyterian church, experienced severe schisms. For instance, in relation to the schisms in the EP, Omenyo notes, “It is important to note that some of these groups [i. e. the groups that broke away from the EP] were forced out of the Church due to their unwillingness to accept the Church’s traditional teachings and personality clashes between their leaders and the Church’s leadership.”⁶⁷¹ As a result, the following independent churches broke away from the EP: the Apostles’ Revelation Society (ARS), led by Charles Kobla Nutomuli Wovenu, the White Cross Society, led by Nunola Frank Kwadzo Doh and the Lord’s Pentecostal Church led by John Sam Amedzro of Peki who was excommunicated together with his prayer group in 1960 because the church could not accommodate his Charismatic renewal movement; the Christ Evangelical Mission (previously Evangelical Presbyterian Reformed Church) led by E.N. Atiegar who personally broke away from the EP after conflicts over authority and ownership of property.⁶⁷² From these examples of the EP alone, one sees the enormous impact of the emergence of especially the AICs on mainline churches.

Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 73. Omenyo, ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’, 182. See Gifford, African Christianity, 95 – 96. Omenyo, Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism, 173. Omenyo, 173 – 80.

138

3 The Ghanaian context

Certainly, all the accounts above relate to the past when AICs and PCCs emerged. In the contemporary Christian landscape in Ghana, the distinction between the mainline churches and the other streams of Christianity is difficult to hold, for mainline churches have responded over the years to the impact of the AICs and PCCs, particularly in curbing the drift of their members (especially the youth) to the latter. Nevertheless, it is still true that some members of mainline churches, without leaving their churches, patronise activities of especially Pentecostal-Charismatic ministries. Moreover, the relationship between the mainline churches and these later ones has shaped largely the Christianity in Ghana today. To the positive influence. As just noted, the mainline churches responded to the challenge presented them by the new Christian churches. To show that the mainline churches took their impact seriously, one has just to note that, not only did the PCG Synod (now General Assembly) set up a committee in 1965 to investigate the influence of these churches on the PCG and make recommendations as to how to respond accordingly, the Methodist Church Ghana also had a Conference report in respect of same.⁶⁷³ From these steps of these two mainline churches, one observes that it was a conscious response from their side. Some positive responses were that, 1. they took steps to adjust their liturgical practices to incorporate Charismatic renewal phenomena like speaking in tongues, prophesying, healing and deliverance, drumming, dancing, clapping, etc. into their worship services. In this regard, Asamoah-Gyadu observes, “With the gradual integration of Charismatic renewal phenomena in to historic mission church life, a ‘Charismaticization’ of Christianity is currently underway in African Christianity.”⁶⁷⁴ He further opines that, “This process is evident not only in the adoption of Pentecostal/Charismatic media culture, but also in the programmes and liturgical reforms occurring in the historic mission Christianity.”⁶⁷⁵ 2. Moreover, such “reforms occurring in the historic mission Christianity” also permitted members who had been influenced by the Charismatic movement and did not leave their churches to operate within them. By and large, the responses of the mainline churches in terms of integrating Charismatic renewal phenomena that characterised the new churches into their litur-

 Asamoah-Gyadu, Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity, 12.  Asamoah-Gyadu, 11.  Asamoah-Gyadu, 11.

3.5 Conclusion

139

gical practices was chiefly to stem the drift of their members to these new but vibrant churches.⁶⁷⁶

3.5 Conclusion Context largely affects reception of a text because its readers are situated beings who read in light of their lived realities. Presenting the foregoing contextual factors in Ghana and the kind of Christianity that prevail there, therefore, contributes to building the relevant contextual background for understanding the receptions of the study text presented in Part IV (i. e. chapter 5) below. Regarding Christianity in Ghana, the three streams largely dominate the Christian context, namely the mission founded/mainline Christianity, the African Instituted Christianity (AIC) and the Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity (PCC). As underscored above, the two later streams emerged because of the failure of the former to offer a Christianity that addressed the religious aspirations of Ghanaians because it overlooked the prevailing traditional worldview and perception of reality. In concluding this part, however, it should be restated that it is only for discussion purposes that these three streams are mentioned here, for as could be seen especially in Omenyo’s study, there are other segments of Christianity in Ghana. These are mostly non-denominational and, in some cases, inter-denominational Charismatic groups. Concerning this, the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International, Women Aglow, etc., could be added here. They were not discussed because their ethos is much like the latter two streams of Christianity particularly with their emphasis on the Holy Spirit and Charismatic renewal. Another important point in discussing the emergence of these forms of Christianity is their particular interpretation of scripture aided by the availability of mother-tongue translations of the Bible. Accordingly, the following part of the study will sketch out the hermeneutical setting within which such interpretations take place.

 Cf. Asamoah-Gyadu, 11.

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana 4.1 Introduction Having noted in the previous part the different factors that shape the Ghanaian context for this study, this part will discuss the hermeneutical environment in Ghana within which biblical interpretation and reception take place. The importance of this part lies evidently in the fact that reception issues from how biblical texts have been read and interpreted. Since the hermeneutical setting in Ghana is not different from that which prevails in many other African Christian contexts, the sources that will be used here will include not only Ghanaian authors but also other African authors who discuss the subject of biblical hermeneutics in Africa. In doing this, the interest will be to present various hermeneutical approaches in Africa and especially those that are dominant in Ghana. Moreover, a section of this part, anticipating the reception part of this study, will dedicate itself to a prior discussion of biblical reception in Ghana. Accordingly, unique reception(s) of Christology in Ghana at both academic and popular levels will be presented just as, in a similar vein, Capitein’s eighteenth century translation of the LP will be discussed as an example of reception via mother-tongue translations.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa) Biblical hermeneutics in Africa has developed continuously in post-independent Africa within the nascent discipline of African Biblical Studies⁶⁷⁷ producing different but interrelated approaches to biblical interpretation. A good depiction of this historical trajectory is given by Justin Ukpong in his contribution in Gerald West and Musa Dube’s edited, The Bible in Africa: Transactions, trajectories and trends. ⁶⁷⁸ In this contribution, he presents a historical development of biblical interpretation in Africa noting the specific methods in each stage of the trajecto-

 For a presentation on the development and characterisation of African Biblical Studies, see Andrew M. Mbuvi, ‘African Biblical Studies: An Introduction to an Emerging Discipline’, Currents in Biblical Research 15, no. 2 (2017): 149 – 78.  Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube, eds., The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories, and Trends (Leiden: Brill, 2000). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-006

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

141

ry.⁶⁷⁹ What is of interest to this study, however, are: 1) what characterises such a setting of biblical interpretation which is termed here as hermeneutical setting and 2) importantly, what approaches are used in this setting to decode the biblical texts for the multifarious and differentiated African context(s)? Beginning with the first question, attention is drawn to West’s observation that, “Biblical interpretation in Africa typically consists of three poles: the pole of the biblical text, the pole of the African context, and the pole of appropriation.”⁶⁸⁰ He thinks of the pole of appropriation as the domain of the African reader who brings both text and context into dialogue.⁶⁸¹ Accordingly, the following characterises the African hermeneutical setting. 1. Precisely because it is the reader who brings his/her specific context and the biblical text into conversation, different approaches to interpretation, based on different concerns and interests that the reader brings to the text, dominate the biblical hermeneutical setting in Africa. 2. Moreover, because it is the reader who is the key actor in the interpretative process and who seeks answers from the text to questions s/he puts to the text, biblical hermeneutics in Africa remains contextual with the results of any exegetical enterprise confined in erster Linie to the context in which and for which it was done.⁶⁸² 3. Furthermore, the interpretative interest issues from the existential situations of various African contexts⁶⁸³ and the hermeneutical process is expected to produce results that will address the existential concerns. For this reason, Ukpong has described the interpretive process in Africa (vis-à-vis that of the west) as existential and pragmatic in nature and contextual in ap-

 Ukpong, ‘Developments in Biblical Interpretation in Africa’.  Gerald West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, in African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, ed. Diane B. Stinton, SPCK International Study Guide 46 (London: SPCK, 2010), 21.  Cf. Ukpong who in noting the three elements of all contextual theologies, namely context, text and pastoral agent, argues for a consideration of the conceptual frame of reference within which the pastoral agent [i. e. the reader in Gerald West’s category] does the reading and interpretation than the agent him/herself. Therefore, he proposes that instead of the “context, text, and pastoral agent” scheme, one should consider a “context, text and conceptual frame of reference” scheme. Justin S Ukpong, ‘Towards a Holistic Approach to Inculturation Theology’, Mission Studies 16, no. 2 (1999): 109.  See Justin Ukpong, “Inculturation Hermeneutics: An African Approach to Biblical Interpretation,” in The Bible in a World Context: An Experiment in Contextual Hermeneutics, ed. Walter Dietrich and Ulrich Luz (Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2002), 17.  See Agbonkhianmeghe E. Orobator, “Contextual Theological Methodologies,” in African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, ed. Diane B. Stinton, SPCK International Study Guide 46 (London: SPCK, 2010), 6.

142

4.

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

proach.⁶⁸⁴ Similarly, West contends that, “Interpreting the biblical text is never, in African biblical hermeneutics, an end in itself. Biblical interpretation is always about changing the African context.”⁶⁸⁵ From this quote emerges another feature of the hermeneutical space in Africa: it aims at “changing the African context,” i. e. bringing about transformation in the context(s).

Taking together, it needs hardly be stated that African biblical hermeneutics is highly reader-centred—the reader plays an active role in the hermeneutical process and it is from his/her perspective that the Bible is read. The reader-centredness also implies that the interest in engaging the biblical text is to get it to address the contextual needs/interest of the reader. As point 1. above indicates, different hermeneutical approaches exist in the interpretative enterprise in Africa. In what follows, therefore, the major ones—inculturation, mother-tongue, feminist, liberation and post-colonial biblical hermeneutics—will be discussed albeit briefly (certainly, the first three will be slightly detailed as they are prominent in varying ways in Ghana) and that will address the second question posed above.

4.2.1 Inculturation biblical hermeneutics Both Agbonkhianmeghe E. Orobator, SJ. and Gerald West acknowledge that inculturation hermeneutics (IH) as an interpretative approach is the best-known approach in biblical hermeneutics in African Christian theology.⁶⁸⁶ As a result, different understandings surround its meaning and application. Consideration will, however, be given to Orobator, West and especially Ukpong who has given detailed attention to it. Defining it in respect of theological reflection in Africa, Orobator considers inculturation hermeneutics simply as “(…) a way of doing theology that takes into account the religious sensibilities and disposition of the [African] people.”⁶⁸⁷ Since West in his definition of IH quoted Ukpong, his will be skipped and that of Ukpong will be considered. He considers IH as “(…) a contextual hermeneutic

 Ukpong, ‘Inculturation Hermeneutics’, 17.  West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 22.  Orobator, ‘Contextual Theological Methodologies’, 6; West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 23.  Orobator, ‘Contextual Theological Methodologies’, 6.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

143

methodology that seeks to make any community of ordinary people and their sociocultural context the subject of interpretation of the Bible.”⁶⁸⁸ Ukpong goes further to articulate that IH’s distinguishing mark is that it advances for and emphasises usage of the reader’s “conceptual frame of reference” in the interpretive process with the end being effecting sociocultural transformation in the reader’s context.⁶⁸⁹ What one observes in both Orobator’s and Ukpong’s understanding is that IH privileges the African reader and his/her context which is congruent with the characterisation of the hermeneutical setting above. Moreover, one could deduce that Orobator’s “religious sensibilities” and “disposition” are analogous to Ukpong’s “sociocultural context” and “conceptual frame of reference” respectively. In short, they are both in different ways expressing, in essence, the same thing about IH. However, Ukpong, by italising “subject” in the quote above, places greater emphasis on his position that the African readers and their contexts are made subjects (i. e. agents of interpretation) in the hermeneutical process. Moreover, West in commenting on Ukpong’s submission on IH notes that Ukpong in particular stretches the scope of IH beyond sociocultural and religious aspects of the readers to include the economic, the political and the historical aspects. West makes this assessment noting that mostly it is the religious and cultural aspects that receive much attention in doing inculturation hermeneutics in Africa.⁶⁹⁰ But Ukpong discloses (in another work) his reason for expanding the scope of IH to include economic, political and historical aspects.⁶⁹¹ In this work in which he discusses the broader subject of inculturation theology (in which IH finds its application), he notes that the use of philosophical and anthropological approaches in inculturation led to a focus only on sociocultural and religious aspects. Despite noting the positive side of using these approaches as having contributed to a better understanding of ATRs and culture in relation to Christianity, he contends that the two approaches have been limited to religious aspects of culture to the neglect of secular aspects, namely economic, social and political aspects.⁶⁹² Consequently, he calls for a “holistic” approach to inculturation theology, which he termed as “sociological-anthropological” approach.⁶⁹³ He explains this approach as follows,

     

Ukpong, ‘Inculturation Hermeneutics’, 18. Ukpong, 18. West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 23. Ukpong, ‘Towards a Holistic Approach to Inculturation Theology’. Ukpong, 101– 7, 124. Ukpong, 104, 107– 8.

144

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

This approach is so called because it combines the sociological understanding of culture as the totality of a people’s way of life with the anthropological understanding as world view, and as a system of symbols and their meaning. It adopts a holistic approach to culture. This means that culture is understood existentially in a way that pays attention to its traditional and modern aspects, and to its various manifestations in contemporary life. The sociological-anthropological approach seeks to develop a holistic inculturation theology that creates encounter of the Christian message with both the religious and the economic, political and social context, and that seeks a radical interpretation of the Christian faith using an African conceptual frame of reference.

Following from the above, one can characterise inculturation biblical hermeneutics in Africa as follows. 1. It starts from outside the academy; from the daily life experiences of ordinary people.⁶⁹⁴ Ukpong, for instance, places emphasis on the “ordinary people” and their context, because it is from their point of view that any biblical text using this approach is understood. Moreover, it is from their specific contexts that resources are drawn for the hermeneutical task.⁶⁹⁵ Examples of hermeneutical resources from the context include, arts, proverbs, folklores, etc. Therefore, he considers that this approach grants “epistemological privilege”⁶⁹⁶ to the ordinary people and their contexts. 2. In addition, as Ukpong has noted, it makes use of the local conceptual frame of reference which includes in its understanding the worldview of the people. Ukpong explains what he means by this as follows: “A conceptual frame of reference is a mental apparatus. It refers to the type of understanding of the universe that informs the reading [of a text], that is, the mind-set that is at work in the reading process. It comprises a particular set of worldviews, values, disvalues, and basic assumptions about reality.”⁶⁹⁷ 3. Moreover, because IH privileges the reader, his/her context and his/her conceptual frame of reference, it is inherently contextual. This implies that interpretation is done from a particular standpoint and the meaning of a given biblical text produced from that standpoint is (in this sense) also initially limited to the context within which it is formed.⁶⁹⁸ 4. Related to its contextual nature is that a meaning of a biblical text is produced through a conversation between the reader’s context and the socio-

    

West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 23. Ukpong, ‘Inculturation Hermeneutics’, 19 – 20. Ukpong, 21. Ukpong, 24, Cf. Ukpong, ‘Towards a Holistic Approach to Inculturation Theology’, 111– 13. Ukpong, ‘Inculturation Hermeneutics’, 26 – 27.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

145

historical context of the text.⁶⁹⁹ This implies that inculturation as a hermeneutical approach in African biblical interpretation does not disregard the original contexts of the biblical texts but takes it into consideration. (In this lies one of the strengths of this approach). 5. Furthermore, the interpretive process is geared towards transforming the context of the reader. This means that efforts are made to bring the biblical message into incarnation in the local contexts as “good news” to the people.⁷⁰⁰ 6. Additionally, IH takes a holistic view of culture, i. e. seeing culture as having both secular/material and religious/sacred dimensions. Taking a holistic view of culture also means that every aspect of culture including the ordinary/commonplace contributes to knowledge production and therefore constitutes a worthy object of theological inquiry.⁷⁰¹ 7. Also, IH demonstrates an oppositional attitude towards biblical interpretations ‘imposed’ by and inherited through Western mission Christianity.⁷⁰² This oppositional attitude stems from the fact of the neglect of African religious sensibilities and conceptual frame of reference in the biblical reflections done by Western missionaries and later the Christianity they founded in Africa. As noted earlier above, mission founded Christianity suffered much in the post-missionary era because the western-styled Christianity inherited was alien to the African conception of religion. 8. Finally, if the attitude of opposition issues from this reason, IH, however, professes trust in the Bible interpreted in the manner already explained, in that it considers it as having “good news” for the African contexts; good news that can transform the contexts.⁷⁰³ This hermeneutical approach has, however, not gone uncriticised. David T. Ngong (a Cameroonian) in particular has argued vehemently, not against the approach as whole, but according to him, its overemphasis of the African worldview which he describes as “enchanted worldview” or “spiritualised cosmology.”⁷⁰⁴ As a starting point for his essay, he outlines: “(…) this essay critically evaluates a particularly significant claim which this method [i. e. inculturation hermeneutics] of reading makes—that inculturation hermeneutics takes the Afri-

     

Ukpong, 26 – 28. Ukpong, 28 – 29. Ukpong, 29. West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 24. West, 24. David T. Ngong, ‘Reading the Bible in Africa’, Exchange 43 (2014): 176.

146

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

can spiritualised cosmology seriously (…). The essay therefore focuses on critiquing a particular element of inculturation biblical hermeneutics rather than a rejection of the method in general.”⁷⁰⁵ In his view, the overemphasis of the spiritualised cosmology has not allowed much room for rational and critical thinking and the “development of a scientific imagination” in Christian Africa which are much needed to advance development in the continent: “(…) the uncritical appropriation of the African spiritual cosmology in inculturation Bible reading seems to be directly inimical to the development of the scientific imagination.”⁷⁰⁶ For him, therefore, the whole point is not just validating the enchanted worldview of Africans but balancing that with rationalism that creates room for science and technology which are much needed for any meaningful development in Africa.⁷⁰⁷ Importantly, he observes that this rationalism and scientific imagination is in no wise alien to the African worldview but a part of it, just that stressing too much the spiritual aspect of the African cosmology has clouded that aspect.⁷⁰⁸ While agreeing with Ngong for the need to critically engage the Bible in the African contexts in a manner that truly and transformatively deals with the problems beleaguering Africa, it is also important to bear in mind that the multifaceted nature of the socio-economic problems of Africa does not allow them to be easily solved by simply cultivating a scientific imagination and introducing science and technology. It is not only Ngong who holds a critical view on inculturation biblical hermeneutics in Africa, African feminist theologians have also criticised it. Their main critique is that inculturation hermeneutics has, in its focus on culture, excluded African women theologians’ experience of culture. For they argue further that inculturation processes start normatively with African males’ experience.⁷⁰⁹ This criticism stems from their own hermeneutical approach—African feminist biblical hermeneutics—which will be discussed shortly below.

 Ngong, 176.  Ngong, 185.  Ngong, 177.  Ngong, 186.  Isabel A. Phiri and Sarojini Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, in African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, ed. Diane B. Stinton, SPCK International Study Guide 46 (London: SPCK, 2010), 94.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

147

4.2.2 Mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics If inculturation biblical hermeneutics encourages the use of resources within a given culture as interpretive tools to interpret a biblical text for that culture, then mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics (MTBH) singles out one of such cultural resources in its hermeneutical emphasis: language. The language in question is clearly defined—mother-tongue. The questions that then need to be answered before explaining MTBH are 1) what “mother-tongue” is, 2) how different it is from “vernacular” and 3) what “mother-tongue scriptures” are. Current Ghanaian scholars like John Ekem and B. Y. Quarshie who passionately advance this approach to biblical interpretation in Ghana are united in defining mother-tongue as a person’s native language into which s/he is born and in which s/he grows up. Quarshie states that, “The mother tongue of a person is that person’s native language, the language that one is born into (…) and grows up with.”⁷¹⁰ “It is a person’s first language,” he explains further, “as compared to other languages one might learn later in life, for example, in school.”⁷¹¹ This understanding of mother-tongue, for Quarshie, is to be distinguished from vernacular, which he considers as, “(…) the common language of a region or group, no matter how naturally such a language and its usage may come.”⁷¹² Ekem, writing later and quoting Quarshie, shows his agreement with Quarshie’s definition of both concepts—mother-tongue and vernacular—but notes, “(…) a mother tongue can eventually become a person’s vernacular, depending on how widely it is spoken across geographical boundaries.”⁷¹³ The definition of mother-tongue and its differentiation from vernacular allow for a consideration of mother-tongue scriptures to be the Scriptures or the Bible as translated into a mother-tongue.⁷¹⁴ Examples include the Twi Bible, the Kusaal Bible, the Ga Bible, the Dagbani Bible, the Likpakpaaln Bible, etc.; all being mother-tongue Bible translations in Ghana some of which will later be considered for their translation of the Lord’s Prayer.

 B. Y. Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context: The Challenge of MotherTongue Scriptures’, Journal of African Christian Thought 5, no. 1 (June 2002): 7.  Quarshie, 7, see also ; Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, 48; Jonathan E T Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics: A Current Trend in Biblical Studies in Ghana’, Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies 3, no. 4 (2012): 576 – 77.  Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context’, 7.  Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, 48.  Cf. Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context’, 7; Jonathan E T Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Doing African Biblical Studies with Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics Approach’, All Nations University Journal of Applied Thought 1, no. 1 (2012).

148

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

It follows from the above conceptual clarification that MTBH as an interpretive approach, “Involves (…) re-packaging the thought embedded in an ‘original revelation/message’ [of a biblical text] for speakers of other languages, taking cognisance of relevant theological, linguistic and cultural factors.”⁷¹⁵ Ekem’s point here, therefore, is to communicate the “original biblical texts” in a manner that meets the receptor audience’s needs whose worldviews are different from the original recipients of the biblical texts.⁷¹⁶ The main task of this hermeneutical approach to biblical interpretation in Africa, then, is that it interprets the biblical texts “via Translations and Commentaries in local languages [i. e. mothertongues]”⁷¹⁷ expressing the biblical message in indigenous thought categories with the attempt not only to bridge the gap of “strangeness” between the “original texts” and the contemporary African receptor audience, but also to make the texts speak to their socio-economic, political and religious needs as well. Put differently, MTBH engages scholarly “the indigenous language translations of the Bible in order to understand what they say and mean to the readers;”⁷¹⁸ it is an “interpretation of the biblical texts via Ghanaian/African mother-tongues and their relevance for contemporary Church and society.”⁷¹⁹ It consequently presupposes at least two main things. The first presupposition is that the Bible is translated into the mother-tongues in question with accompanying mother-tongue commentaries. Undoubtedly, the translation of the Bible into indigenous African languages started in the missionary era when some mission societies like the Basel Missionary Society made it a mission policy to translate the Bible into local languages under the conviction that it was necessary for indigenous converts to read, be taught and to hear the Gospel in their natives languages.⁷²⁰ For instance, in Ghana (then Gold Coast), Johannes Zimmermann translated the Ga Bible by 1866, Johannes Gottlieb Christaller the

 Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, 48.  Ekem, 48.  John D. K. Ekem, Interpretation of ‘scripture’ in Some New Testament Documents: Lessons for the Ghanaian Context (Accra: African Christian Press, 2015), 55, see also, John D. K. Ekem, Priesthood in Context: A Study of Priesthood in Some Christian and Primal Communities of Ghana and Its Relevance for Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics (Accra: SonLife Press, 2009), 188.  Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Doing African Biblical Studies with Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics Approach’.  John D. K. Ekem, ‘Professorial Chair Inaugural Address’, Journal of Mother Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics 1, no. 1 (May 2015): 167, Cf. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana): The Historical, Linguistic, and Theological Settings of the Ga, Twi, Mfantse, and Ewe Bibles, 10.  Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context’, 7.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

149

Twi Bible by 1871, Robert Moffat the Setswana Bible (in Botswana) in the 1820s, Edwin Smith, the Ila New Testament Bible (in Zambia), and John Taylor, the Ibo NT Bible (in Nigeria) by 1866 (the same year as that of Zimmermann). This translation endeavour has, undeniably, been carried forward in the post-missionary era mainly through Bible Societies⁷²¹ in various African countries. Part of that endeavour has been to re-translate missionary translated Bibles as some of them were done from secondary sources—from English and other European languages into African languages—and not from the original Hebrew and Greek sources. The theological underpinning of such translation efforts, for Quarshie, is “the acknowledgement that God does indeed speak all languages of the world, including the indigenous languages of Africa.”⁷²² The production of mother-tongue Bible commentaries is rather comparatively slow given the enormous demands of such undertakings. Nevertheless, Ekem cites Samuel Quist who produced a commentary on Matthew’s Gospel in Ewe,⁷²³ the mother-tongue of most Ghanaians in the South-East of Ghana.⁷²⁴ Ekem himself, being not only an ardent proponent but also a practitioner of this approach, has produced Greek-Mfantse Commentaries on Philemon and 2, and a GreekAsante Twi Commentary on Colossians.⁷²⁵ Both the translation of the Bible into mother-tongues and the production of corresponding commentaries in the given mother-tongues further presupposes the availability of reading communities into whose native languages the Bible has been translated. Here an immediate challenge comes up: “While the majority of people [in Ghana] who speak English also [can] read [in] it, the same is not

 In Ghana, translation agencies include, the Bible Society of Ghana (BSG), the International Bible Society (IBS), the Ghana Institute of Linguistics, Literacy, and Bible Translation (GILLBT). See Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Doing African Biblical Studies with Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics Approach’.  Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context’, 7.  I visited the Bremen Staatsarchiv on 4 March 2019 to see this commentary for myself.  Ekem, Interpretation of ‘scripture’ in Some New Testament Documents, 55 – 56.  John D. K. Ekem, ‘Mother Tongue Commentaries on New Testament Texts in a Ghanaian Context’ (Göttingen, 4 October 2018), 6. Titles of these mother-tongue Bible commentaries are: Krataa a Pɔɔl kyerɛwee dze kɛmaa Faelimɔn: Ne Nkyerɛkyerɛmu Fi Griik Kasa mu kɔ Mfantse Kasa mu [“the Letter Paul wrote to Philemon: Its explanation from the Greek language into the Mfantse language]; Krataa a Wɔkyerɛwee dze kɛmaa Kolossae Asɔr: Ne Nkyerɛkyerɛmu Fi Griik Kasa Mu kɔ Mfantse Kasa mu [the Letter that was written to the Colossian Church: Its explanation from the Greek language into the Mfantse language]; Nwoma a Wɔtwerɛ de kɔmaa Kolose Asafo: Ne Nkyerɛkyerɛmu Firi Hela Kasa mu kɔ Asante-Twi Kasa mu [the Letter that was written to the Colossian Church: Its explanation from the Greek language into the Asante-Twi language].

150

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

the case with persons who only speak mother tongue languages.”⁷²⁶ In other words, not all persons who can speak their mother-tongue can also read in it. The problem is further compounded by the fact that not all mother-tongues in Ghana are coded or reduced to written forms. Some still exist in their oral forms.⁷²⁷ Therefore, language literacy in the mother-tongues is needed for those who can only speak and not read and write in their mother-tongues and for the mother-tongues that still exist in oral forms to be reduced to written forms. This will facilitate the comprehensive impact of mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics. The second main presupposition follows from the first, namely that there is need or rather availability of biblical scholars and teachers who have linguistic and cultural expertise of the given mother-tongues into which the Bible has been translated. For it is acknowledged that the mother-tongue scriptures require an immersion into the culture of the language and the understanding of the worldviews therein.⁷²⁸ The relevance of MTBH in Ghana (and much of Africa) is that the production of mother-tongue scriptures generated a crucial factor in the rise of especially AICs.⁷²⁹ Moreover, its relevance for the present study is that the mother-tongue translations are considered as a form of reception of the biblical texts into those languages because such translations, as the quote from Ekem above intimates, involves “re-packaging” the message of the biblical texts. Doubtlessly, such re-packaging efforts involve interpretation, re-interpretation and re-semanticisation.⁷³⁰ Characteristically, mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics just like inculturation biblical hermeneutics⁷³¹

 Daniel N. A. Aryeh, ‘Contemporary Hermeneutics: An Examination of Selected Works of John D. K. Ekem on Mother Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics for the African Context’, The Journal of Inductive Biblical Studies 4, no. 2 (Summer 2017): 209.  Aryeh, 188.  Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context’, 8.  Not only that, but mother-tongue scriptures also have generated socio-cultural implications for the corresponding reading communities. See Sule-Saa, “The Redemptive Role of MotherTongue Scriptures: The Case of the Dagomba and Konkomba of Northern Ghana,” 18 – 29, for a discussion on the impact of mother-tongue scriptures on the Dagomba and Konkomba communities of Northern Ghana.  See Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 37; Ekem, Interpretation of ‘scripture’ in Some New Testament Documents, 56.  One could even argue that mother-tongue hermeneutics qualify as a subdivision in inculturation hermeneutics precisely because of its requirement of cultural literacy and reader-centredness.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

1.

2.

3.

4.

151

requires cultural literacy of the given mother-tongue. For the understanding is that language is an embodiment of culture, indeed the outer skin of a given culture.⁷³² For instance, one requires an understanding of the Akan culture with its worldview to properly interpret the Twi Bible to a Twi speaking audience. Moreover, it is reader-centred in the sense that the hermeneutical process issues from the readers’ perspective and is aimed at producing meaning that is relevant for the context of the reading community. Precisely because of this, MTBH just like inculturation hermeneutics above, is not only contextual, but also directs the interpretive results at socio-economic and cultural transformation in the readers’ context. This is part of Ekem’s point in the following quote: “(…) we need to come up with context-sensitive translations and interpretations that take cognisance of the core message of Scripture and yet are judiciously repackaged in response to the needs of recipients.”⁷³³ The same point is underscored in the other quote of his above; namely that the biblical text that are interpreted via the mother-tongues should be made relevant “for Church and society.” Additionally, this approach claims global relevance not in terms of its interpretive results, but as an approach in itself. This comes to fore in Ekem’s position that, “mother-tongue theological exercise embraces all languages, irrespective of whether they are ‘localized,’ ‘nationalized,’ ‘regionalized’ or ‘globalized’.”⁷³⁴ In other words, to the extent that every living language is someone else’s mother-tongue, MTBH can be used everywhere the Bible has been translated into indigenous languages.

In terms of methodology, practitioners⁷³⁵ of this approach argue for an eclectic approach, i. e. picking and choosing different methods of interpretation to deal with the biblical texts in their socio-historical and literary contexts before their transposition into contemporary contexts. For this reason, Ekem contends  Quarshie, ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context’, 8.  Ekem, Interpretation of ‘scripture’ in Some New Testament Documents, 53 (emphasis mine).  Ekem, 59 – 60; Ekem, ‘Professorial Chair Inaugural Address’, 166.  Philip Laryea applies this approach in engaging exegetically with Acts 14:8 – 17 and 17:22– 31 as translated in the Ga Bible. See Philip T. Laryea, ‘Reading Acts 14:8 – 17 & 17:22– 31 in Ga: A Critical Examination of the Issues, Meanings Interpretations Arising from Exegesis in the Mother-Tongue’, Journal of African Christian Thought 6, no. 1 (June 2003): 35 – 43. Kuwornu-Adjaottor applies it also in his doctoral dissertation, Jonathan E T Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Assessment of Three Problematic Texts in the Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament of the Dangme Bible’ (unpublished PhD Thesis, Kumasi, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, 2018).

152

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

strongly for the combination of such other methods like the historical-critical methods, literary-rhetorical methods, etc.⁷³⁶ Indeed, this point of his is seen in the above quote when he moots for “context-sensitive interpretation that takes cognisance of the core message of Scripture.” Such cognisance taking requires the above-mentioned exegetical methods. He makes implicitly the same point in another work in which he states about four requirements for biblical studies in Ghana/Africa via mother-tongues: 1) proficiency in one’s own mother-tongue, 2) mastery of the biblical languages, 3) comprehensive understanding of the biblical world and 4) in depth understanding of the worldviews of the [Ghanaian/] African communities.⁷³⁷ Certainly, points 2. and 3. fall under the ambit of historical critical approaches.

4.2.3 African feminist biblical hermeneutics If IH puts culture and the Bible at the heart of its interpretive enterprise using resources from the given culture and if MTBH labours also in communicating the biblical message in a manner that meets the needs of the receptor communities through mother-tongues, African feminist biblical hermeneutics brings a different perspective and emphasis to the hermeneutical process. The different perspective finds expression, contrary to inculturation hermeneutics’ trustful attitude towards culture and the Bible in particular, in African women theologians’ suspicious and critical disposition towards both entities—culture and Bible.⁷³⁸ For this reason, African women theologians who are primary proponents of this approach insist on combining what they call “cultural hermeneutics” with biblical hermeneutics in the interpretive process. By cultural hermeneutics, they mean a critical analysis of culture, identifying and promoting positive aspects of culture that are life-affirming, -enhancing and -promoting for especially African women, while confronting those that are oppressive and life-denying

 Ekem, ‘Mother Tongue Commentaries on New Testament Texts in a Ghanaian Context’, 6. See also the works of his protégé, Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Doing African Biblical Studies with Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics Approach’; Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics’.  Ekem, ‘Professorial Chair Inaugural Address’, 166.  Cf. West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 26; Mercy Amba Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, Introductions in Feminist Theology 6 (Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001), 12.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

153

with the hope of transforming them.⁷³⁹ The same critical approach is transferred to the Bible and its given culture. For Isabel Apawo Phiri and Sarojini Nadar, “African women theologians speak of ‘feminist cultural hermeneutics’ as a tool for analysing both the biblical practices of culture, and the various cultures within Africa.”⁷⁴⁰ Cultural hermeneutics is used precisely also because, for the Ghanaian female theologian and pioneer of this approach, Mercy Amba Oduyoye, “African women have identified culture as a favourite tool for domination”⁷⁴¹ A characterisation of this approach is, therefore, as follows. 1. It expresses a hermeneutic of suspicion towards the Bible and culture despite its leanings towards inculturation biblical hermeneutics in its incorporation of culture.⁷⁴² Accordingly, it openly critiques both the Bible and culture especially in places where they particularly suggest suppressive attitudes towards women. 2. Noteworthy, however, is that while the hermeneutical process is geared towards transformation, just like IH and MTBH, such transformation is not envisaged only for women but also for all in society.⁷⁴³ The hermeneutical standard in the interpretive process is therefore “abundance of life,” namely what enhances, affirms, promotes and liberates life. Anything less than this is to be criticised, rejected and, where possible, transformed.⁷⁴⁴ 3. Another feature of this approach is that the proponents insist on its contextual and perspectival nature. This they insist because the starting point of the hermeneutical exercise is the distinctive existential experiences and the life stories of African women.⁷⁴⁵ 4. Moreover, their emphasis on experience and context in using this approach brings them to differentiating their approach from other feminist approaches in the West, surely because experience is contextual and varies from one place to the other.⁷⁴⁶

 Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 12– 15; Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 94– 96.  Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 94.  Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 12.  See West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 26; Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 13.  Cf. Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 95.  Phiri and Nadar, 94– 97; Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 16 – 18.  Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 16 – 18; Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 91– 93.  Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 91– 92, cf. Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 15.

154

5.

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

Additionally, it identifies and emphasises women’s role in the biblical narratives as well as critiques the biblical uses of divine masculine categories. For example, it is hard to overlook Oduyoye’s reference to Jesus as “Jesus the son of Mary” in her opening sentences of chapter four of her cited work here.⁷⁴⁷ Such sensitivity to gender designations in the Bible has definite implications for the invocation of the Lord’s Prayer in which God is declared as “Our Father” (πάτερ ἡμῶν). Indeed, as underlined in the exegetical part of this work, François Bovon for instance has argued that the notion of divine fatherhood incorporates what it means to be a woman.⁷⁴⁸ But as it was also noted there in a footnote, Musa Dube (who as a proponent of this approach has expanded it into “post-colonial feminist hermeneutics”⁷⁴⁹) will not be satisfied with Bovon’s suggestion. For she has asserted that such a designation of God makes the heavens a realm of patriarchal power which hardly has any liberative vision for women who suffer forms of gender oppression.⁷⁵⁰

Taking together, African feminist biblical hermeneutics combines features of both inculturation and liberation biblical hermeneutics. Its liberation leaning is seen in its emphasis on rejecting oppressive elements and promoting liberative and life-affirming aspects of the Bible with the overarching emphasis on societal transformation.⁷⁵¹

4.2.4 Liberation biblical hermeneutics Liberation biblical hermeneutics is more dominant in southern Africa especially in South Africa because of the struggle against the erstwhile Apartheid System. There, it is connected more to Black Theology. It certainly takes inspiration from its South American roots of Liberation Theology exemplified in the work of Gustavo Gutiérrez in 1973. Basically, liberation hermeneutics “reads the Bible from the point of view of justice for the poor and the oppressed.”⁷⁵²

 Oduyoye, Introducing African Women’s Theology, 51. Emphasis mine.  Bovon, Das Evangelium Nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35, 2:126.  Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 99.  Dube Shomanah, ‘Praying the Lord’s Prayer in a Global Economic Era’, 444. In this article, she employs this approach to interpret the Lord’s Prayer.  Phiri and Nadar, ‘African Women’s Theologies’, 96.  Mbuvi, ‘African Biblical Studies’, 161.

4.2 Biblical hermeneutical approaches in Ghana (and Africa)

155

Characteristically, in Africa, it takes as its starting point the existential experiences of ordinary people, emphasising the political and economic elements of the African context.⁷⁵³ Moreover, race and class are critical categories drawing methodologically heavily on Marxist/materialist conceptual frameworks in the hermeneutical process.⁷⁵⁴ It mounts oppositional stance against the [post‐]colonial project and is strongly critical of the Bible for having served as a source of oppression.⁷⁵⁵ The interpretive process is geared keenly towards liberation from all oppressive politico-economic, racial and class structures. Indeed, all the hermeneutical approaches discussed so far share liberative elements. However, this approach dedicates itself strongly and entirely to the liberation agenda.⁷⁵⁶

4.2.5 Post-colonial biblical hermeneutics Post-colonial hermeneutics takes liberation hermeneutics a step further by interpreting the Bible in a manner in which, “(…) imperialist strategies are confronted, exposed, and arrested by postcolonial subjects.”⁷⁵⁷ This is premised on its proponents’ conviction that “(…) not only were the political systems of colonialism complicit in the oppression of African subjects, but also the Bible itself helped to create and sustain the framework of the existence of such systems.”⁷⁵⁸ Consequently, like the African feminist hermeneutics above, it is suspicious of the Bible because of its inseparable link with European imperialism.⁷⁵⁹ Typically, therefore, it aims the hermeneutical process at exposing centres of power and control in contrast to the peripheries.⁷⁶⁰ Its ardent proponents are currently African biblical feminists like Musa Dube. Moreover, it recognises the multiplicity of identities and the differences that make up the post-colonial African context, and finally, it leans more towards liberation and African feminist hermeneutics⁷⁶¹ than to inculturation and mother-tongue hermeneutics.

 West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 24.  West, 24; Mbuvi, ‘African Biblical Studies’, 162.  West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 25.  For examples of works done using this approach, see Mbuvi, ‘African Biblical Studies’, 161– 62.  Musa Dube, 2000, 23, cited in Mbuvi, 164.  Mbuvi, 164, Cf. West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 27.  West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 27.  Mbuvi, ‘African Biblical Studies’, 164.  West, ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’, 28.

156

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

From the discussion of these five major biblical hermeneutical approaches in Africa⁷⁶² (with the first three relating more to the Ghanaian context), one gains the picture of the hermeneutical setting in Africa (to restate an initial point) as largely reader-centred and particularly context sensitive with the interpretive exercise not aimed solely at intellectual comprehension of the biblical texts but particularly and more importantly at the transformation of the multifaceted African contexts. This discussion is necessary as it allows for easy understanding of how biblical texts are received in the Ghanaian contexts. Consequently, the final section of this part will discuss two cases of reception—Christology and an early translation of the Lord’s Prayer—in which will be shown how the reader-centredness of the hermeneutical setting in Ghana plays a key role and at the same time add to the contextual background for the discussion in Part IV (i. e. chapter 5).

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician’: Ghanaian Christology as an example of biblical reception in Ghana The point was earlier made that the reader-centredness of the Ghanaian hermeneutical setting provides a fertile ground for different biblical receptions in Ghana. The following discussion of Christology as construed in Ghana will illustrate this point. If the Christian kerygma presents the good news of how God was in Jesus of Nazareth reconciling the world to himself and not reckoning to the world its trespasses (2 Cor 5:19a), then Christology centres on this Jesus, the Christ whose obedient submission to God the Father resulted in such reconciliation. Put simply, it is a reasoning about the person and mission of Jesus, the Christ. The New Testament accounts present us with varying Christologies, but as John Pobee has observed, “the diverse Christologies [in the NT] converge and agree on two points: “Jesus is truly man and at the same time truly divine. (…) The humanity and divinity of Jesus are the two nonnegotiables of any authentic Christology.”⁷⁶³ For

 See Mbuvi, “African Biblical Studies,” 163 – 64; Jesse N. K. Mugambi, “Theology of Reconstruction,” in African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, ed. Diane B. Stinton, SPCK International Study Guide 46 (London: SPCK, 2010), for a discussion on reconstructionist hermeneutics, and Phiri and Nadar, “African Women’s Theologies,” 96, 98 – 99, for internal differentiations in the African feminist hermeneutics.  Pobee, Toward an African Theology, 83.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

157

the purposes in this section, however, biblical Christology⁷⁶⁴ is not the direct interest, instead, how such a Christology has been re-interpreted and re-expressed in the Ghanaian Christian context. In Ghana (just as in other parts of Africa), the discussion on Christology has its starting point in the question Jesus of Nazareth, according to the Synoptists, posed to his disciples (Matt 16:13b//Mark 8:27:b; Luke 9:18b): “Who are people saying the Son of Man is” (τίνα λέγουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου)? This question allows Ghanaians to formulate their own contextual response(s) as to who Jesus Christ is to them and in their current situations and not whom Western missionaries said he is to them. Such an authentic Ghanaian (and indeed African) response could be appreciated at both academic and popular levels.

4.3.1 Academic perspective(s) on Christology in Ghana The academic sources presented here, albeit not exhaustive, take their interpretive data from the popular interpretations of the Christ event making attempts to understand such interpretations within the religio-cultural contexts of Ghana. For instance, the first source to consider here is Kofi Appiah-Kubi’s article on Christology in Africa.⁷⁶⁵ In this work, he states his sources as taken from the African Instituted Churches (AICs)⁷⁶⁶ and the experiences of African (Ghanaians precisely) Christians which he re-expresses in academic idioms.⁷⁶⁷ For the purpose of clarity, there is need to digress here shortly to note two things: first, that much of African Christian theology starts from outside the academy, because of the reader and context centred nature of it as it is evidenced in the discussion on the hermeneutical approaches above and that is also evident in the sources Appiah-Kubi uses. Second, that mostly (especially with the early generation of African theologians) the term “Africa” is usually used in a generalising sense in such theologising activities even if the primary data for the theological tasks is taken from one African country. For instance, Appiah-

 For a systematic theological deliberation on Christology see, Daniel L. Migliore, Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology, 3rd ed. (Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2014), 168 – 204.  Kofi Appiah-Kubi, ‘Christology’, in A Reader in African Christian Theology, ed. John Parratt (Denver, Colorado: iAcademicBooks: International Academic Publishers Ltd., 1997), 65 – 74.  See the section on Christianity for details on the AICs.  Appiah-Kubi, ‘Christology’, 65.

158

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

Kubi as presented here draws his data largely from the Ghanaian context; the same applies to John Pobee whose Christology will also be discussed here. Both are Ghanaian authors using largely Ghanaian data, yet they use the general term “Africa” as if to say that such material is representative of all the diverse contexts in Africa. Certainly, it cannot be. Undeniably, however, they acknowledge this conceptual limitation and argue only on the point that the similarities across the different African contexts are large. This then explains the use of “Africa” in such works where one African country⁷⁶⁸ provides the source data for discussion. This is also the sense in which Africa⁷⁶⁹ is used in this work particularly in places where the point being made has application in other African contexts. Having noted this, attention will be given to what Appiah-Kubi found as understandings or rather contextual responses to the Christological question posed above. The hermeneutical orientation of his presentation is largely inculturation hermeneutics. He starts by indicating how the African understanding of ‘Man’ (i. e. anthropology) as only meaningful in a community allows for easy identification with Jesus in terms of he being “truly man” (i. e. human being). This is explained by the similarities between the rites of passage underwent by Jesus as presented in the Gospel accounts and the rites of passage known in African traditional societies, namely birth, naming and death/burial ceremonies.⁷⁷⁰ These are common rites in Ghanaian societies which properly incorporate a person into society as a true human member. In addition, the genealogies of Jesus presented in Matthew and Luke are also considered as part of the means of identification with Jesus as truly human because the saying in Ghana is that “the child resembles the father but has a clan.”⁷⁷¹ In other words, even though the child has an immediate family (nuclear family) it also belongs to a larger family. It is instructive to note here how resources from the interpreter’s culture (i. e. the Ghanaian culture) is used to understand and explain the humanity of Jesus. This is one of the markers of inculturation biblical hermeneutics as indicated above. Moreover, not only is Jesus received as an embodied being who qualifies to live as a member of a human community based on the Ghanaian cultural understanding, he is also understood in different ways based on his deeds in life as mediated through the Gospels. First, he is received as a Mediator or Intermediary, surely because among the Akans of Ghana, for e. g., chiefs and kings hardly  Indeed, even in that one African country, in most cases, it is one part of the society that is considered. Taking Ghana as an example, it is mostly the Akan contexts that is considered.  Indeed, the geographical coverage of the term is limited to sub-Saharan Africa.  Appiah-Kubi, ‘Christology’, 66.  Appiah-Kubi, 66.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

159

speak directly to their subjects except through an intermediary, called Okyeame, roughly translated as “spokesperson” or “linguist.” In the same way, the chiefs and kings themselves mediate between their subjects and the ancestors just as the ancestors in turn mediate between the living and the ultimate God.⁷⁷² Consequently, the concept of mediation is common to this setting and allows for an understanding of Jesus as the mediator between God and humans. The only difference that needs to be noted here is that this contextual understanding of mediatorship hardly knows the element of propitiation or removal of sin as a key component of biblical mediation.⁷⁷³ Second, Jesus is a “Saviour, Power and Redeemer.” Appiah-Kubi comes to this reception of Jesus in AICs by observing that deliverance is the “commonest theme” in the faith praxis of these churches which simultaneously reflects the African Christians’ preoccupation with the need for redemption from all physical and evil forces⁷⁷⁴ that are believed to frustrate efforts at attaining fullness of life in the present world. This perception of Jesus is the same as what has been termed as Christus Victor, which John Mbiti considers as one of the commonest understandings of Jesus in Africa.⁷⁷⁵ It is to be noted that this understanding of Jesus ties in neatly with the African understanding of religion as one that meets soteriological ends in the present. The miracle stories of Jesus in the Gospels, therefore, provide the hermeneutical resources for constructing this understanding of Jesus as they project him as one who has power over the demons and indeed all evil forces. I suggest here that this understanding just like the previous one is informed by the religio-cultural setting, and more clearly in this case, one sees the influence of the Ghanaian cosmology at work. For within this cosmology that permits an understanding of life as liable to the influences of malevolent spirits (including evil spirits like witches, etc.), it is understandable why Jesus will be held out as Saviour, Power and Redeemer to whom African Christians run to receive freedom because he is the al-mighty and all-powerful.⁷⁷⁶ In addition (and like the saviour-power-redeemer understanding), Jesus is understood as a Liberator. According to Appiah-Kubi,

 Appiah-Kubi, 67.  Appiah-Kubi, 67.  Appiah-Kubi, 68.  John Mbiti, 1973, cited in, Kwame Bediako, Jesus in Africa: The Christian Gospel in African History and Experience, second, Theological Reflections from the South (Akropong-Akwapem: Regnum Africa, 2013), 22.  See, Appiah-Kubi, ‘Christology’, 69. This understanding of Jesus supports the inclusion of worldview and indeed socio-cultural dimensions as contextual factors that could affect the interpretation and thereby the reception of biblical texts in Ghana.

160

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

Liberation here must be understood in its totality, as removal of all that which keeps the African in bondage, all that makes him[/her] less than what God intended him to be. It connotes the total idea of liberation from fear, uncertainty, sickness, evil powers, foreign domination and oppression, distortion of his[/her] humanity, poverty and want. In brief, it embraces religious, political, socio-economic, spiritual and mystical, personal and societal concerns of the African [Christian] convert.⁷⁷⁷

Jesus as liberator, therefore, liberates, based on this understanding, the African from all these concerns. According to Appiah-Kubi, the key text that underlies this conception is Luke 4:18‐19. Here one observes how social, political and economic factors lead to such an interpretation of the Christ event. Moreover, it shows leanings to the liberation hermeneutics discussed above. Lastly, in Appiah-Kubi’s analysis of Christology in Ghana (and Africa in general), Jesus is understood as Healer par excellence. The background to this understanding is tied to primal understanding of spiritual causation of illnesses and diseases in Ghana. Witches and other malevolent spirits are believed to be able to inflict pathological conditions on their victims that defy scientific-medical remedies. This does not mean that Ghanaians (and Africans) reject natural causation of diseases. What it means, however, is that within traditional religious culture, health is understood as a part of an individual’s relationship to the supernatural.⁷⁷⁸ Therefore, answers are (aside the natural sources) also sought in the supernatural for illnesses, especially those that defy medical explanations and cure. At least, the widespread phenomenon of prayer camps in Christianity in Ghana where healings are sought lends credence to this understanding. It is thus within such a traditional understanding that Jesus is received as the healer of all time who can decode all spiritual mysteries relating to diseases and illnesses. It is then easy to understand the AICs’ and now the PentecostalCharismatic churches’ emphasis on deliverance and healing in which prayers are said in the name of Jesus to exorcise evil spirits and break curses of witchcraft that are believed to be behind a patient’s condition. Significantly, the resort to the supernatural for healing does not again mean a rejection of modern medicine, but a complementation of it and, instructively, an affirmation of the notion of religion and health as belonging together. Better expressed, “health (…) is not an isolated phenomenon, but part of the entire magico-religious fabric.”⁷⁷⁹ Here too, just like the others, the influence of the prevailing Ghanaian cosmology where the acts of a lower reality can be undone by a higher reality can be seen

 Appiah-Kubi, 70.  Appiah-Kubi, 71– 72.  Appiah-Kubi, 72.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

161

and in this case Jesus is not just a higher reality but precisely the Ultimate Reality. Appiah-Kubi’s presentation on Christology has been considered first because what other portraits or understandings of Jesus one may encounter in, for instance, Pobee’s work on African Christology or indeed in popular readings like the songs and prayers of Afua Kuma are essentially the same compared to that of Appiah-Kubi, even if they are expressed in different ways. That noted, attention will be shifted to John Pobee’s work on Christology in Africa. He, as a biblical scholar⁷⁸⁰ approaches the task of constructing a Ghanaian-African Christology by first assessing the NT accounts of Jesus. In doing this, he rejects any metaphysical abstraction of Christology in the NT and argues rather for the NT material on Christology to be understood in the functional terms in which it is expressed.⁷⁸¹ Further, he acknowledges that there are different kinds of Christology in the NT, but argues that all of them rest on two controlling ideas: that’s Jesus’s humanity and divinity.⁷⁸² On this premise, he presents NT sources that point first to Jesus’s humanity and second to his divinity. New Testament data on his humanity, according to Pobee’s analysis, are: Jesus’s birth, his anthropological make up as soul, spirit and body, his finitude of knowledge (for e. g. not knowing the precise date of the Parousia) and power, and his conscious dependence on God.⁷⁸³ For his divinity, the NT witness of his sinlessness, his authority and power as both agent of creation and judge of all creation as well as his pre-existence in eternity are considered.⁷⁸⁴ From this perspective, Pobee re-interprets the NT data in the same humanity-divinity divide in the Akan-Ghanaian context drawing parallels from the religio-cultural setting of the Akan society to the NT data presented. In doing this, he is careful to draw attention to places where the parallelism breaks because of discrepancies between the Akan context and the NT context. For the purposes here, only some of the images or conceptions of Jesus that result from his re-interpretation of the NT data within the Akan-Ghanaian context will be presented. First, he, just like Appiah-Kubi, notes how the similarity between Akan-Ghanaian rites of passage coupled with the community-centred understanding of the human being and that of the NT aids easy comprehension of Jesus’s humanity in the Akan context.⁷⁸⁵ In other words, rites of passage, like

     

In contrast, Appiah-Kubi was, disciplinary-wise, more a sociologist. Pobee, Toward an African Theology, 82. Pobee, 83. Pobee, 84. Pobee, 87. Pobee, 88 – 91.

162

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

the birth and naming ceremony of Jesus, his death and burial, etc., fit easily into Akan socio-cultural understanding of true humanity. Second, he portrays Jesus as Great and Greatest Ancestor resulting from his contextualisation of Jesus’s divinity markers such as his authority and power to judge the deeds of people.⁷⁸⁶ His corresponding local concept for Jesus as Great and Greatest Ancestor is Nana. He explains this attribution to Jesus as corresponding to what the Supreme Being (i. e. Onyame) and the ancestors in Akan society do, namely providing sanctions for the good life and punishment for evil. In other words, the Onyame and the ancestors are believed to reward persons who demonstrate good conduct in society with the good things of life and punish severely those who behave otherwise. Based on this, Pobee considers that Jesus can comfortably be received in the Akan socio-cultural context as the Great and Greatest Ancestor or Nana. ⁷⁸⁷ But he immediately adds that “(…) even if Jesus is Nana like the other illustrious ancestors, he is a nonpareil of a judge; he is superior to the other ancestors by (…) being closest to God and as God. As Nana he has authority over not only the world of men [i. e. human beings] but also of all spirit beings, namely the cosmic powers and the ancestors.”⁷⁸⁸ What he does here is to differentiate Jesus and draw attention to his exaltedness above those who are originally classified as Nana. This is a conception of Jesus not found in Appiah-Kubi’s presentation. Another portrait of Jesus in Pobee’s work is Jesus as Okyeame and Chief. These two conceptions stem from the underlying Akan context in which chiefs do not speak directly to their subjects (as noted above) but through an intermediary, Okyeame who because of that must be rhetorically gifted in public speaking. By his relationship to the chief as a spokesperson, the Okyeame could also be seen as the chief since he conveys his words. The relationship between the chief and Okyeame in Akan royal setting is so intimate that, according to Philip Laryea, he is sometimes referred to as ᴐhene yere, i. e. the chief’s wife. Consequently, he undergoes, upon the demise of the chief, widowhood rites just like the actual wives of the chief.⁷⁸⁹ Indeed, Laryea indicates that the concept of the Okyeame is a whole institution in itself which exists mainly because of two reasons: 1) the sacral nature of the chief and 2) the power of the spoken word.⁷⁹⁰ The first reason is explained in

 Pobee, 94.  Pobee, 94.  Pobee, 94.  Philip T. Laryea, ‘Mother-Tongue Theology: Reflections on Images of Jesus in the Poetry of Afua Kuma’, Journal of African Christian Thought 3, no. 1 (June 2000): 54.  Laryea, 54.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

163

terms of the belief that the chief in the Akan context possesses a sacral character by virtue of mediating between the spiritual world of the ancestors and his subjects. Therefore, direct contact with subjects must be avoided since he radiates power.⁷⁹¹ The second reason follows from the first, namely because of his sacral character and the power he radiates, his words carry power and if his subjects were to hear him speak directly to them, they could be harmed. Consequently, the Okyeame takes the words of the chief and reformulates them using euphemisms and proverbs to make them less injurious for the subjects.⁷⁹² Following from this, Jesus as an Okyeame could be seen as an intermediary between God and humanity (cf. 1 Tim 2:5 – 6) in which case it will come close to Appiah-Kubi’s concept of Jesus as Mediator-Intermediary. But Pobee does not dilate further on the Okyeame concept as he ties it to the chief concept and rather expands on that. Therefore, Jesus is a chief in this sense. Since chiefs in the Akan setting perform sacral and priestly functions, Jesus as chief also does same which is evidenced in his salvation bringing mission to the world.⁷⁹³ Here too, Pobee notes the distinction between the priesthood of Jesus and that of the Akan: that of Jesus transcends this world into heaven as well.⁷⁹⁴ He adds that just as an Akan chief also functions as head of a community, Jesus too as chief is a head of a community, namely the church.⁷⁹⁵ Again, he notes the distinction between the Akan chiefship and that of Jesus: the chiefship of Jesus unlike that of the Akan, transcends ethnic and geographical barriers; it “embraces all mankind.”⁷⁹⁶ Furthermore, the portrait of mediator-intermediary in Appiah-Kubi also finds expression in Pobee’s analysis. In this regard, he, just like Appiah-Kubi, draws on the socio-political structure of Akan traditional society in which chiefs and kings play a central role to explain how that allows for a reception of Jesus as the true mediator between human beings and God. By re-interpreting and recontextualising the NT Christology this way, Pobee comes to the conclusion that a “royal-priestly Christology” would hopefully speak better to the hearts of

 Laryea, 54.  Laryea, 54.  Pobee, Toward an African Theology, 95 – 96.  Pobee, 95 – 96.  Pobee, 96.  Pobee, 96. Certainly, the chief conception of Jesus runs into problems of being a theologia gloriae that does not know suffering, in which case it will not fit well with Jesus who perfectly fits into a theologia crucis. But Pobee solves this, albeit not completely, by referring to instances of some chiefs in Akan society coming into chiefship through suffering. See p. 97 for details on this.

164

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

Akans and other Africans. Moreover, he notes in this conclusion that his royalpriestly Christology is just one kind of Christology that could be constructed in an Africa setting.⁷⁹⁷ From the discussion on Pobee, the following are noteworthy: 1) one can see clearly that the main hermeneutical approach underlying his work is inculturation biblical hermeneutics, 2) one also observes that the use of such a contextual hermeneutical approach in which resources within a given culture (here the Akan culture) are employed in the interpretive process, leads determinatively to the results that are found, namely Jesus as a Great and Greatest ancestors, Jesus as Nana, Jesus as Okyeame, Jesus as a chief, etc. In other words, the underlying hermeneutical approach influenced the generation of these images of Jesus in the Ghanaian context. These conceptions of Jesus together with that of Appiah-Kubi—Jesus as mediator-intermediary, saviour, power, redeemer; liberator and healer—could be considered as forms of reception of this foundational NT theme; Christology. Giving that Kwame Bediako reacted to Pobee’s “Great and Greatest Ancestor” conception of Jesus, there is need to extend the discussion further by considering his perspective.⁷⁹⁸ For Bediako, Pobee’s proposal of seeing Jesus as the Great and Greatest Ancestor and particularly his discussion of it through Akan wisdom sayings and proverbs do not tackle the religious nature of the question. Pobee posed a question in his discussion of Christology in Africa, namely “Why should Akan relate to Jesus of Nazareth who does not belong to his clan, family, tribe and nation?”⁷⁹⁹ In response to this, Bediako asserts that the starting point on reflecting on Jesus’s place in Ghanaian traditional setting is not the particularity of Jesus as a Jew, even though that is rightly important, but with his universality.⁸⁰⁰ He argues, “We need to also make the biblical assumption that Jesus Christ is not a stranger to our heritage, starting from the universality of Jesus Christ rather than from his particularity as a Jew, and affirming that the Incarnation was incarnation of the Saviour of all people, of all nations and of all times.”⁸⁰¹ The point of the incarnation being “for all people, nations and all times” explains what he means by “the universality of Jesus Christ.” As indicated, he acknowledges the particularity of Jesus as a Jew, but argues that through that particularity and through faith in him, Ghanaian/African Christians receive an

 Pobee, 98.  Otherwise, the data from Appiah-Kubi and Pobee establishes well the point of this subsection.  Pobee, Toward an African Theology, 81, Cf. Bediako, Jesus in Africa, 24.  Bediako, Jesus in Africa, 24.  Bediako, 24.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

165

“adoptive past” which covers the divine promises to the patriarchs and given through the history of ancient Israel. In other words, African Christians through faith in the Jewish Jesus who indeed is at once the universal Saviour of all, have no longer only their natural past, but also “an ‘adoptive’ past, the past of God, reaching into biblical history itself, aptly described as the ‘Abrahamic link’.”⁸⁰² In this wise, Bediako thinks that Jesus comes to the Akan religio-cultural setting no longer as a stranger but as one whom the Akan ancestral cult (which Pobee draws on to think of Jesus as the Great and Greatest Ancestor) anticipated in its aspirations. Stated differently, Jesus truly and more than enough fulfils the aspirations that the Ghanaian ancestral cult only approximated, for which reason it is functionally no longer necessary.⁸⁰³ Consequently, for Bediako, it is no longer a question of how the strangeness of Jesus can be “brought home” for e. g. into the Akan context—for by his universality of Jesus and adoptive past line of argument, Jesus is no longer a stranger— but how this Jesus who has truly fulfilled the religious aspirations embodied in the ancestral cult of Akan and indeed much of Africa can truly and fully be understood. He suggests a way to this new end, namely using mother-tongue scriptures and mother-tongue hermeneutics. According to him, “A helpful way of growing in understanding [of this redefined Jesus] is to read and listen to the Word of God in our own languages. [For] in matters of religion, no language speaks to the heart, mind and innermost feelings as does our mother-tongue.”⁸⁰⁴ What Bediako’s discussion in relation to Pobee’s conception does is that it reveals the risk involved in attempting to inculturate biblical themes in a given culture, using interpretive tools as exemplified in inculturation biblical hermeneutics. The risk is that one can get too engrossed in such a process that the full extent of a given biblical text or theme for a given context may not be fully explored. The foregoing is all from the academic side of the discussion, but it will help to look, albeit shortly, at the popular sources as well by considering the praises and prayers of Afua Kuma.

 Bediako, 24.  Bediako, 25 – 31.  Bediako, 32.

166

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

4.3.2 Popular perspective: Afua Kuma and Jesus of the deep forest By popular sources or perspective here is meant reflections on Jesus and the Christ event outside the academy, among generally non-literates, for which reason the widely used prayers and praises of Afua Kuma qualifies for this section. Mostly, as can be seen from the sources of especially Appiah-Kubi, the popular sources provide the raw data for the academic construction of Christology and other theological reflections in Ghana (and Africa in general). Accordingly, it would not be surprising to observe similarity or even sameness in the conceptions of Jesus at the two levels of discussion. A little biography of Afua Kuma will help understand the portraits of Jesus that are found in her work; “Jesus of the Deep Forest: Prayers and Praises of Afua Kuma” and its Twi original, “Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ: Kwaebirentuw ase Yesu.”⁸⁰⁵ Afua Kuma (1900 – 1987), as she was popularly known,⁸⁰⁶ was a member of the Church of Pentecost (one of the leading classical Pentecostal churches in Ghana). She comes from Obo Kwahu in the Eastern Region of Ghana. She was a non-literate farmer and an experienced traditional midwife.⁸⁰⁷ Her work stated above is a collection of her oral praises of and prayers to Jesus.⁸⁰⁸ The English translation of the Twi original⁸⁰⁹ was done by Jon Kirby. Her work is considered here mainly because of its easier accessibility as a documented piece and it has received much academic attention in Ghana as well. Moreover, even though Afua Kuma is long dead, one can find similar understandings of the Christ event (as she expresses in her work) in contemporary Christianity in Ghana. She, untrained and uneducated in Christian theology, in the form of praises and prayer, presents Jesus using local traditional and modern societal imageries within a Christian imagination. Within these prayers and praises which are more poetic, her deep insight into the Christ event can be observed. The images found in her work demonstrate her familiarity with modern institutions such as the Police, the military, the justice system, education system, economy, etc.

 Afua Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest: Prayers and Praises of Afua Kuma, trans. Jon Kirby (Accra: Asempa Publishers, 1980); Afua Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ: Kwaebirentuw ase Yesu (Accra: Asempa Publishers, 1980).  She was actually called Christiana Afua Gyan.  See preface to the English version by Fr. Jon Kirby.  One could rightly say that she is the ‘oral author’ of the work.  According to Fr. Jon Kirby, the Twi original was written down by Vincent Adjepong and Michael Owusu using a tape-recorded version done by Peter Kwasi Ameyaw.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

167

One encounters different portraits of Jesus in reading her work all of which cannot be presented here.⁸¹⁰ Her opening sentences reveal the content of her work: WE are going to praise the Name of Jesus Christ. Yԑ bԑtonton We shall announce his many titles: they are true and they suit him well, so it is fitting that we do this. All-powerful Jesus⁸¹¹

Yesu Kristo din ho. Ampa ara! Ԑse no, ԑfata no. Yԑbԑbᴐ no mmeran. Obirԑmpᴐn Yesu a wadi aninsԑm⁸¹²

Right from this opening part, one meets a major image and theme which will find different expressions in the rest of the book: “The All-powerful Jesus,” in the Twi, “Obirԑmpᴐn Yesu” [the most Prominent Jesus].⁸¹³ This theme will underlie the rest of the images of Jesus, be they related to royal titles, or the world of magic and divination, or to farming and fishing, or to modern state institutions or to economic activities.⁸¹⁴ The Jesus that is proclaimed as all powerful is unequalled in all these sectors of life; he stands tall. He is not just the “All-powerful Jesus who engages in marvellous deeds,” he is also the “O great and powerful Jesus, [the] incomparable Diviner.”⁸¹⁵ This conception of Jesus recalls AppiahKubi’s Jesus as power. The presentation of Jesus as all-powerful is understandably important in the setting that Afua Kuma was situated; a setting which has been described already in terms of its cosmology. Within this setting where there is keen awareness of spirit forces impinging on life and influencing it for ill and good, it makes absolute sense not to start such intense reflections on Jesus from the position of seemly weakness and defeat, namely the place of the Passion and the Cross. Surely, Afua Kuma knows about the suffering or rather the suffered Jesus, for she is emphatic that, “It is not for his miracles, or wonderful works alone, that we are following him, (…) Jesus! [They] have

 Philip Laryea dedicates an article to appraising in detail the different representations of Jesus in Afua Kuma’s work. See Laryea, ‘Mother-Tongue Theology’.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 5; Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 5.  Indeed, a native speaker will realise that there are obvious discrepancies between the Twi original and the English translation. My translation of the Twi section would have been: “We are about to praise the name of Jesus Christ, Indeed! It befits him, it suits him, We are about to proclaim his appellations.” Because of this, I will attempt in places of such discrepancies to provide another translation.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 5; Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 5.  There are indeed portraits of Jesus in her work that link him to all these sectors of society, see Laryea, ‘Mother-Tongue Theology’.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 5 – 6.

168

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

taken you and nailed you to the cross. On the cross they have nailed him.”⁸¹⁶ Notwithstanding this, it is telling and worth noting that her work starts with the power dimension of Jesus. Right after been presented as All-powerful, Jesus is considered as the “Saviour of the poor.”⁸¹⁷ If one were to think of this conception of Jesus in relation to Luke’s Gospel, one could say that it is a Lucan image of Jesus. For Luke certainly presents Jesus prominently as the one who takes the side of the poor, vulnerable and weak. This is clear in how he introduces Jesus into his public ministry: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free.”⁸¹⁸ In this programmatic quotation from Isaiah, the Lucan Jesus is presented as one sent to the vulnerable and marginalized as the four categories of people italicised in the quote attest. Coming back to Afua Kuma’s Jesus as the saviour of the poor, noteworthy is that precisely because of this understanding of Jesus, Afua Kuma assures creditors of the poor as follows, If I buy your goods on credit, have no fear; if I don’t pay you, you shouldn’t complain: for I’m going to ask a very generous Man [i. e. Jesus], and get the money to pay you.⁸¹⁹

In addition, for Afua Kuma, not only is Jesus All-powerful and saviour of the poor, he is also a wonder Worker, an incomparable Diviner and a Magician. Wonder worker, you are the one who has carried water in a basket and put it by the roadside for the travellers to drink for three days. [The] Magician who walks [upon] the sea he arrives at the middle [of the sea], plunges his hand into the deep [of the sea] [when he brought up his hand, he was holding] a whale!⁸²⁰

 Kuma, 39; Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 35.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 5; Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 5.  Luke 4:18, NRSV, emphasis mine.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 32; Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 30.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 5 – 6; Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 5 – 6. The modifications to Kirby’s translation are mine.

4.3 ‘Jesus, the healer par excellence, the Okyeame, the Magician.’

169

It is immediately obvious that the portrait of Jesus here has something to do with his power. Nevertheless, Laryea has observed that within the local traditional setting of Afua Kuma, diviners for instance were also considered as advisors, diagnosticians, seers, prognosticators, priests and doctors. But by associating these functions or images to Jesus, according to Laryea, the understanding one should get from Afua Kuma is that these functions have been fully fulfilled in Jesus Christ.⁸²¹ Another portrait of Jesus worth considering here is his relationship to modern state institutions such as the police and military, justice and education systems. In Afua Kuma’s reflection, Jesus has a clear role to play in these areas: O Jesus! Chief among teachers, Through whom we teach our children wisdom! Chief of lawyers, to whom we bring our complaints; You stand at the court and defend the poor. Chief of Police, a big riffle stands at your side! (…) Prisoners depend on you as the tongue on the mouth. Among soldiers and police, the commanding officer. Teacher of teachers Pencil of teachers Which brings knowledge to the children! Spokesman of lawyers! Helper of Police! Victorious Chief of soldiers! Food of prisoners!⁸²²

From these excerpts, not only is Afua Kuma’s knowledge of the various modern state institutions observable, one also sees her sincere attempt to insist that her Jesus whom she convincingly and passionately eulogises is not limited only to the private sphere of life, but actually is right in the middle of every aspect of societal life, doing precisely this, “(…) wip[ing] away the distortions and reinvest[ing] the [named] institutions with the ideals for which they were established.”⁸²³ Indicators to this refinement of the institutions are carried in metaphors like Jesus being the “Pencil of the teacher,” the “Helper of Police,” etc. For because he is the pencil of the teacher, in other words, the means of output of the teacher (synecdochally, a representation of the education system), efficiency

 Laryea, ‘Mother-Tongue Theology’, 53.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 11– 12, 22, 29 – 30. Emphasis mine.  Laryea, ‘Mother-Tongue Theology: Reflections on Images of Jesus in the Poetry of Afua Kuma’, 56.

170

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

can be achieved. Moreover, rightly because he is the helper of the Police, the perceived corruption of that institution in the Ghanaian context can be done away with. Therefore, as Laryea has underscored, Jesus in Afua Kuma’s reflection, brings new meaning to these institutions. Three more images of Jesus that are still worth considering here include; “Jesus as a doctor of the sick,”⁸²⁴ “Jesus as the truthful Okyeame”⁸²⁵ and “Jesus as the good mother.”⁸²⁶ As a doctor of the sick (which resonates with the “Jesus as healer par excellence” conception above), Jesus heals all the sick by taking away all their diseases. For, “Jesus is the one, who fills his basket with [multitude of] sickness,⁸²⁷ and dumps it into the depths of the sea. He has been here already and taken sickness away.”⁸²⁸ In another stanza, Jesus is the one who has “tied together both sickness and death, and cast them into the sea, This is the reason the nations rejoice, and the people are happy.”⁸²⁹ One notices that in both cases, the sea is the disposal ground. The image of the sea could be explained in the sense that, whatever is thrown into the sea, is hard to recover again, for the sea takes it away. By implication, the sickness that Jesus takes away would not return, for he is a healer par excellence. But he is not just a doctor of the sick, Jesus is also the truthful Okyeame. The concept of the Okyeame and the conception of Jesus as Okyeame have been discussed already in the academic level above. There is, however, need to dilate a bit further on it here because Afua Kuma qualifies her conception of Jesus as Okyeame, namely that he is an “Okyeame nokwafo,”⁸³⁰ i. e. truthful Okyeame. The qualification is necessary once it is used in reference to Jesus because, as Laryea has observed, as a human being, the Okyeame’s post is fraught with frailties, but in reference to Jesus, who is the Truth, the concept finds its redefinition.⁸³¹ Moreover, Afua Kuma thinks of Jesus as Ͻbaatanpa,⁸³² i. e. a “good mother.” Within the socio-cultural context of Afua Kuma, the concept invokes notions of

 Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 30.  Kuma, 29.  Kuma, 40.  The word translated here as sickness is “ᴐyaredᴐm” in the Twi version. The -dᴐm suffix indicates multiplicity, or crowd, or many. For this reason, I think it will make more sense to translate it as “multitude of sickness”.  Kuma, Jesus of the Deep Forest, 34.  Kuma, 48.  Kuma, Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ, 27.  See Laryea, ‘Mother-Tongue Theology’, 54– 56, for further discussion on this concept.  Laryea presents an in-depth analysis of the word from both etymological and socio-cultural perspectives. See, Laryea, 50.

4.4 Reception via mother-tongue translation

171

the woman as playing biological and nurturing roles. She nurtures both young and old members of the family. Playing these roles well qualifies her as Ͻbaatanpa. The “good” qualification there is taken from the suffix -pa which in Akan (among others) means “good.”⁸³³ For Laryea, the use of this feminine concept in relation to Jesus has two significance, namely, 1) Jesus identifies himself with the woman’s status and roles, and 2) the conception of Jesus of faith transcends gender barriers even if the Jesus of history was a male.⁸³⁴ In all, the various receptions of Jesus at the popular level have been seen— all-powerful, saviour of the poor, wonder worker, diviner, magician, doctor of the sick; his relations to modern institutions of state such as the security establishment, education and justice systems, Okyeame and good mother. Also noted are the similarities between some of these popular conceptions and that of the academic ones presented earlier. It is, however, important to add that Afua Kuma’s reflections on Jesus is a form of inculturation hermeneutics at a popular level, for she draws heavily on hermeneutical resources from her cultural background to interpret the Christ event. In the process, one observes the influence of the primal worldview on her. For she is keenly aware of the spirit world of magic and diviners, etc., but in relation to whom Jesus is the all-powerful. Finally, one realises again that whether at academic or popular levels, a clear trace of the influence of ‘the’ Ghanaian cosmology can be seen at work within the hermeneutical process. If this preceding sub-section dealt with Christology in Ghana as an example of scripture reception in Ghana, then the next and last sub-section under this part will consider an earlier translation of the Lord’s Prayer also as an example of reception.

4.4 Reception via mother-tongue translation: Capitein’s eightieth century translation of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana The consideration of translations of the NT and indeed the entire Bible into other languages, in the present study, Ghanaian mother-tongues as a form of reception is premised on the understanding that (to recall an initially stated point) every translation involves some form of interpretation. That has been observed in the discussions on mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics in which Ekem particu Laryea, 50.  Laryea, 50.

172

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

larly argues for a re-packaging and re-semanticisation of biblical concepts in local categories when translating the Bible into mother-tongues and when doing hermeneutical work on the mother-tongue scriptures. To this extent and to the extent that reception issues out of interpretations as earlier noted, mother-tongue translation is here considered as a form of reception of biblical texts. Moreover, one recalls here the point made by Bediako and Kahl under the discussion on AICs above that mother-tongue Bible(s) did not only contribute to the rise of the AICs, but it also allowed Ghanaians to interpret the Bible as they wanted to and take from it what they considered as its answers to their questions and problems. The element of understanding the Bible as one wants to and taking from it what he/she considers to be its responses to his/her problems are constitutive of reception of the Bible afforded through (mother-tongue) translation. In this direction, Jacobus Elisa Johannes Capitein’s (1717– 1747) earlier translation⁸³⁵ of the Lord’s Prayer will be analysed. Capitein translated the LP into Mfantse, a language of the Fantis, an Akan group settled around the coastal belt in south-western Ghana. As the first African (a Ghanaian to be precise) Chaplain of the Dutch Reformed Church sent on mission work to the Castle in Edina (present day Elmina), he paid close attention to the translation of the Bible into the indigenous language of Edina based on his conviction that hearing the Gospel in their local language will help the indigenous people at Edina to accept it.⁸³⁶ As earlier indicated, part of his translations were the Decalogue, the Apostles’ Creed and the Lord’s Prayer. Through his theological studies at the University of Leiden, he mastered the biblical languages of Hebrew, Latin and Greek (with Dutch as well). Apparently, his conviction on mother-tongue translations was already formed in his student days, for D. N. A Kpobi notes, “Already in his student days in the Netherlands, Capitein had proposed that missionary work could be meaningful only if the people were taught the fundamentals of the Christian message in their own language.”⁸³⁷ In what follows, therefore, is a presentation of his Mfantse translation which he did with the Dutch orthography that was available to him at the time. The

 Other earlier translations of the Lord’s Prayer after Capitein were done by Christian Jacob Protten (1715 – 1769), and Rev. Augustus William Hanson. See Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana): The Historical, Linguistic, and Theological Settings of the Ga, Twi, Mfantse, and Ewe Bibles, 17– 19; Ekem, “Mother Tongue Commentaries on New Testament Texts in a Ghanaian Context,” 3 – 4, for discussions on these.  Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 34.  Kpobi, 2001, 21– 6, cited in Ekem, 34.

4.4 Reception via mother-tongue translation

173

copy presented here with the corresponding English translation is taken from Ekem’s work.⁸³⁸ Following the presentation, some interesting parts will be commented on, noting cases that could be considered as reception. Jínjena Jinnadja (The Father of us all)⁸³⁹ Jínjena Jinnadja endi owassúr [The Father of us all who is unquestionably in the exalted place above, i.e., heaven] Oediên Wobonnejé [May your Name be mentioned/handled with due reverence] Maohínman úmbra [Let your kingdom come] Dieekjereê wojén essúr, ónne adaêde [What you decree should be done in heaven and on earth] Innadubánne mánjen dabaê [Give us our food everyday] O’nne innadebónni jâje fákjejen [And forgive us the wrongs we have committed] Ebíso wájejen adebónni jeédebékjen [If others have wronged us, we shall forgive them] O’nne meêma jenitiêr ónko adebónnim [And do not allow our heads to be pushed into evil] Meêma ebíso ónjyen adebónni [Do not allow others to harm us] A’de ehínman owowárra ónsim [That which is the kingdom is solely in your hands/is ever at your disposal] O’nne oahómadin [And it is indeed your strenght/power] O’nne adeaôje ínjena okán amán injejánoe [And (let) that which is good abide in the everlasting kingdom of light] Ojendâm. [Let it be so].

After comparing the Greek texts of Matt 6:9b – 13 and Luke 11:2a – 4 together with Dutch, Latin and Mfantse translations, Ekem concluded, “Capitein attempted a stimulating translation that blends the Matthean and Lucan versions [with Matthew as the base text] and adapted them to the liturgical needs of his time.”⁸⁴⁰ Part of this adaptation is Capitein’s translation of the invocation as, “The Father of us all who is unquestionably in the exalted place above.” Undoubtedly, in Matt 6:9b, Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, “of us all” is not to be found. The question that must then be posed is why Capitein chose to translate the invocation in this way in his eighteenth century trans-Atlantic slave trade context of Elmina (then Edina) in the then Gold Coast? The import of the question is even strengthened when one considers that Capitein’s employers at the time raised

 Ekem, 35. In this work, he discusses Capitein’s creativity in the mother-tongue translation process and considers him a pioneer in mother-tongue Bible translation and interpretation. He discusses this same topic in his, Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 7– 16.  Adapted with the English translation from, Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 10 – 11.  Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 35, Cf. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 12.

174

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

concerns about his translation. According to Ekem, in a letter dated 10 January 1745, Capitein’s employers in Amsterdam observed among others as follows: We must also inquire about a small book consisting of the following translated items: the Lord’s Prayer, the Faith, and the Law. (…) But the Classis had certain reservations about which it wishes to enquire further. For example, could the translation not in places have kept closer to and in accord with the original text [i. e. the Textus Receptus]? For instance, you know that neither in the Greek text nor in any European translation known to me do the words ‘of all’ appear in the first phrase of the prayer, yet according to the translation (…) made by you, it would read: Father of us all (…).⁸⁴¹

In response to the question posed above, Ekem posits that Capitein’s translation of the invocation as the Universal Fatherhood/Parenthood of God was possibly influenced by his context, namely the context of Edina in a time marked by “ruthless exploitation, enslavement and humiliation of persons created in the image of God.”⁸⁴² In such a context, according to him, it made sense for Capitein to emphasise that God was actually the “Common Parent” of all irrespective of ethnicity, race, social status or gender. This was necessary to disabuse any thinking in the minds of Capitein’s audience in Edina as to whether they shared the same God with the slave masters who were oppressing them.⁸⁴³ Granted this postulation, one perceives how contextual factors impinge on, not only the translation but also, the interpretation of biblical texts. Moreover, this translation is definitely an interpretation of the theology undergirding the invocation and indeed the entire text itself. The reception of the text in the form of interpretation imbedded in translation can be seen here. A universal parenthood conception of God fits neatly into Capitein’s audience’s understanding of God. For within their worldview, God is the God of all human beings and creator of everything. Accordingly, Capitein translated in a way that captured the understanding of God as his audience already knew.⁸⁴⁴ Interestingly, his translation sets the accent on one aspect of Matthew’s conception of God’s fatherhood as it was noted above: the God that the Matthean Jesus presents as Father in the Sermon on the Mount does not only provide

 Kpobi, Mission in Chains, 250, cited in Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 36, Cf. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 14.  Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 35, Cf. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 14.  Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 35, Cf. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 14.  Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 14.

4.4 Reception via mother-tongue translation

175

for his children, but his goodness also extends beyond those addressed as children in Matt 5 – 7 to others (see Matt 5:45). Aside the universal Fatherhood of God conception, Capitein’s translation of the invocation also presents the understanding that God is not domiciled in a topographical area above, but he is ontologically exalted above all things by which he watches and takes care of all creation.⁸⁴⁵ Moreover, his translation of the bread petition as “Give us our food every day” is also noteworthy. For one immediately observes here a possible blend of Matt 6:11 and Luke 11:3. Not only that, it also appears that Capitein sidestepped the problematic adjective in the entire text, τὸν ἐπιούσιον. Interestingly, Ekem, who (as can be seen from the citations so far) commented at large on Capitein’s translation above, does not comment on this part of the translation. But Capitein’s translation of τὸν ἄρτον as “food” is noteworthy. The translation of the word generically as food is telling of his understanding of the whole petition itself, namely that the petition requests more than the mere dish of bread but food in its comprehensive sense. Such a translation makes sense in the context of the translation of God as a “Universal Father” and in the context of Edina in the eighteenth century (as indeed it is today) that whoever assumes fatherhood in the family takes on the responsibility of providing for the family too. A last portion of the translation worth attention here is the rendering of Matt 6:13—καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ— as, “And do not allow our heads to be pushed into evil. Do not allow others to harm us.” According to Ekem, “Among the Akans whom the Mfantse belong, the head symbolises a person’s luck or ill-luck in normal day to day activities.”⁸⁴⁶ Indeed, one will add that it is not only among the Akan that the head has such a metaphorical meaning, but among the Kusaas of north-eastern Ghana too, it carries the same symbolic meaning. That noted, it is important to see how the process through which slaves in Edina at the time went as they got parked onto ships headed to the New Lands of Americas could have influenced Capitein’s use of the “head” as part of his translation.⁸⁴⁷ At the Edina Castle (now Elmina Castle) was a gate now retrospectively called the “Door of no Return.” This Door opened to the shore of the Gulf of Guinea where ships docked waiting to be loaded with slaves for sail to the Americas. The narrowness of the Door required that slaves

 Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 35, Cf. Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 15.  Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 36; Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 16.  Cf. Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 35.

176

4 Hermeneutical setting and scripture reception in Ghana

exited it in a single file.⁸⁴⁸ In such an imagery, considering that exiting that Door was tantamount to landing into a life of slavery and oppression, crudely put, into evil, the head was synecdochally pushed into evil; by implication the persons involved were pushed into evil. Evil here means the life of slavery in the Americas far away from family, never to see them again. Within such a context, a petition such as “And do not allow our heads to be pushed into evil” would have made a lot of sense to the people of Edina and would have also, by extension, been a petition that called for God’s help not to be sold into or captured into slavery. In this case too, one realises that the context of slavery and slave trade allowed for an understanding of this petition not in eschatological terms as prevalent in later exegesis, but in the concrete there and then with slavery/ slave trade construed as the evil or say, temptation if one were to go with the Greek text. The same understanding could be taken from the second part of the petition, “Do not allow others to harm us.” The “others” who could “harm us” at the time of Capitein, with high probability, could have been the oppressors/slave masters (including the African accomplices who sold their own kind into slavery).⁸⁴⁹ Taking together,⁸⁵⁰ ones sees through this early translation of the LP, a reception of the petitions in ways that were influenced much by contextual factors like slavery and slave trade which had economic, political, religious and even social dimensions at the time. It also permits the observation that the translation was done with the target audience in view and probably because of that Capitein felt the need to re-reading the original text. One could, therefore, opine that his work seems to have looked forward to the contemporary Ghanaian/African readercentred hermeneutical space discussed above, even though his work predates it.

4.5 Conclusion An important conclusion from the foregoing is that the various hermeneutical approaches that dominate the Ghanaian hermeneutical environment make this

 And probably bending down with their heads making the first exit appearance outside the castle towards where the ships were docked.  Moreover, it seems that Capitein’s translation of the petition in this manner is a combination of the neuter and masculine senses of the Greek phrase, ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ with the “others” capturing the masculine option and the “harm” representing the neuter part.  One could have discussed also the addition of the doxology and the translation of the Amen as “ojendam,” i. e. “Let it be so.” For discussions on that see Ekem, ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast’, 36.

4.5 Conclusion

177

environment a reader-centred one. That’s, the readers play an active role in the hermeneutical process and results of the hermeneutical process are aimed at the readers’ contexts and their transformation. Therefore, if the thrust of the conceptual framework for this study—reception history—is that it shifts attention to the relationship between the reader and the text, then the reader-centredness of the Ghanaian (African) hermeneutical environment provides a fertile ground for discovering interesting receptions of the biblical texts. This is already evident in the preliminary discussion of scripture reception in Ghana by using Christology and the Capitein’s translation of the LP as case studies. Indeed, underlying the discussion in this part is that reception studies also include considerations of interpretative principles that are dominant in a given reception context. Hence the discussion of the various hermeneutical approaches dominating the biblical hermeneutical setting in Ghana (and Africa as whole). These approaches include, inculturation biblical hermeneutics, mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics, African feminist biblical hermeneutics, liberation biblical hermeneutics and post-colonial biblical hermeneutics. Regarding the preliminary consideration of scripture reception in Ghana, first the discussion of Christology from both academic and popular perspectives established the fact that the religio-cultural background of the given Ghanaian context influenced the interpretation of the Christ event. Broadly, Jesus Christ is considered as a saviour, power, liberator, healer/doctor of the sick, mediator, magician/diviner, Okyeame, chief, Great and Greatest Ancestor, good mother, etc. In line with the present study, these conceptions of Jesus constitute different expressions of the reception of Christology in Ghana. Second, the consideration of mother-tongue translations of biblical texts as a form of reception with Capitein’s eighteenth century translation of the LP as an initial example also shed light on how the prevailing contextual factors such as slavery and the trans-Atlantic slave trade influenced his translation of the text. The resulting translation, as analysed, constituted a creative contextual interpretation of the theology behind the LP for his eighteenth-century audience in Edina, Gold Coast (now Elmina, Ghana). The argument here is that, to the extent that such a translation involved a form of interpretation,⁸⁵¹ the resulting text constituted a form of reception of the themes (in this case petitions) of the text of the LP. In a whole, the overarching aim—to restate a point already made—of this part is to prepare the need contextual background for an informed discussion on the contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana. This will be the subject of the next and final part below.

 Which indeed every translation entails.

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana 5.1 Introduction The foregoing three main parts of the study have accomplished two tasks relevant for the discussions that will take place in this final part: first, the initial part sought to situate and exegete the Lord’s Prayer in its historical biblical context as the Gospel traditions present in the New Testament. The second task, accomplished by the second and third parts, defined the context and its contextual factors for the purpose of clarity on the kind of context the study has in mind in respect of the task of reception and they also provided initial examples of scripture reception in Ghana. The present part builds on this foundation by analysing the different reception cases of the text in contemporary⁸⁵² Ghana. Accordingly, it will consider each reception case with the help of the available data.⁸⁵³ Each reception case is only considered paradigmatic insofar as the material under each case does not exhaust the respective reception area but only exemplifies it. In other words, if one were to take each case of reception as outlined below, one could with the help of additional relevant data pursue it further into details than has been done here. This should, therefore, be borne in mind as one reads the presentations below on the diverse cases of reception of the LP in Ghana.

5.2 Paradigmatic examples of reception I: Mother-tongue Bible translations The reception through mother-tongue translation builds on the previous discussion on mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics as Ekem and others proposed and the commentary on Capitein’s dynamic and innovative translation of the text in his eighteenth-century slave trade context. It can be recalled from those discussions the point that mother-tongue translations involve some form of interpretation and contextualisation for which reason they qualify as source documents for reception studies. Accordingly, here some Ghanaian mother-tongue translations of the Lord’s Prayer are considered. In each case, the mother-tongue trans-

 It is instructive to remember that the reception timeline is Ghana from 1957 till date.  See the main introduction to this study for commentary on the data used in this section. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-007

5.2 Paradigmatic examples of reception I: Mother-tongue Bible translations

179

lated text is presented with a corresponding English literal ⁸⁵⁴ translation and is closed up with a commentary on parts that demonstrate interesting re-packaging of thoughts of the original Greek text in the recipient mother-tongues. First to be considered is the LP in the Asante Twi Bible.

5.2.1 The Lord’s Prayer in the Twerԑ Kronkron Asante Twi Bible (2012) Among the Akan dialects, namely Asante Twi, Akuapem Twi, Mfantse, Bono, Akyem, etc., (all belonging to the Kwa branch of the Niger-Congo family⁸⁵⁵), Asante Twi is probably the widest spoken, not only among its native speakers, the Ashantis (domiciled largely in the Ashanti Region of Ghana) in the South, but also among non-native speakers; all together attracting more than seven million speakers. This implies that the Twi translation of the LP has a potential audience of ca. twenty-three percent (23 %)⁸⁵⁶ of the total population of Ghana. This wide potential audience should be borne in mind as one looks at the text below and the commentary that follows. Matt 6:9 – 13 in the Asante Twi Bible (2012) 9 Enti mommᴐ mpaeԑ sԑ: [Therefore make prayers like this:] yԑn agya a wowᴐ soro, [our Father who is above/in heaven,] wo din ho nte, [your name be blameless/holy,] 10 w’ahenie mmra, [your kingdom come] deԑ wopԑ nyԑ [what you will/desire should be] asase so, sԑdeԑ ԑyԑ ᴐsoro. [on earth, just like it is above/in heaven.] 11 Ma yԑn yԑn daa aduane nnԑ, [give us our everyday food today,] 12 na fa yԑn aka kyԑ yԑn, [and forgive us our debts,] sԑdeԑ yԑde kyԑ wᴐn a wᴐde yԑn aka. [just like we forgive those who owe us.]⁸⁵⁷

 English literal translations are given only to show how the text might sound in native ears and to bring out interesting possible re-interpretations of the text through the translation.  See, Ekem, Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana), 50.  Granted a current total population of thirty million people in Ghana.  The 1964 Asante Twi translation rendered this petition as, “na fa yԑn aka firi yԑn, sԑdeԑ yԑde firi wᴐn a wᴐde yԑn aka” [and lend us our debts just like we lend to those who owe us]. The revision of this translation could have been prompted by the theological problem it raised as to whether God forgives sins/debts or lends them. That’s because fa firi depending on the context could mean, “to lend” or “to pardon” with “to lend,” however, carrying the semantic weight of fa firi.

180

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

13 Na mfa yԑn nkᴐ sᴐhwԑ mu, [And take us not into temptation/trial,] na yi yԑn firi bᴐne mu. [but remove/rescue us from evil.⁸⁵⁸] (Na wo na ahennie ne ahoᴐden ne animuonyam yԑ wo dea daa, Amen.) [For the kingdom and strength and glory belong to you eternally/perpetually, Amen.]

The text with the corresponding English translation above allows for some observations and comments. First, it is interesting that in an ethnic group with a matrilineal descent system (as noted above) and a historical data of heroines such as Yaa Asantewaa (1840 – 1921),⁸⁵⁹ one faithfully translates ὁ πατήρ as “agya.” Agya certainly means a male parent and is used among the Akans to refer to one’s own father. It can also be used as an appellation.⁸⁶⁰ Probably, the translation of ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς as “a wowᴐ soro” gives this popular understanding of “agya” a new meaning especially when one thinks of it in relation to Kwame Gyekye’s submission of a hierarchical Akan ontology as presented earlier above. Based on Gyekye’s submissions, Nyame as the Ultimate Reality occupies the highest place on the Akan ontological hierarchy and that seems to be mirrored in the current translation with God as agya being in “soro,” i. e. above, metaphorically speaking in the exalted realm beyond the human, physical sphere. But even though agya in this wise receives a unique qualification, it still retains the closeness of relationship and function of the referent especially when one holds it together with the bread petition where ὁ ἄρτος there is translated as “aduane,” food in the generic sense. This connection is supported because the referent of “agya” ought not to⁸⁶¹ be only close to the subject, but also assume the role of providing food and other life necessities for the subject. Seeing agya in relation to the bread petition leads to the second observation and comment. The translation of the petition as, “Ma yԑn yԑn daa aduane nnԑ” [give us our everyday food today], is interesting in two ways:

 The translators put an asterisk on this word and indicate in a footnote that it actually means, “rescue/save us from the hands of the evil one [Na gye yԑn firi ᴐbᴐnefoᴐ no nsam]”.  She is said to have courageously led, in 1900, a battle against the British Colonial Rule which not only exiled the then Asantehene (i. e. the king of the then Ashanti Empire) to Seychelles Island, but also demanded the surrender of the Golden Stool which was the mystical soul of the Empire. Yaa Asantewaa, it is said, having been disappointed by the inability of her male contemporaries to revolt against the British colonial incursion, rose to the occasion and provided combat leadership in what has become known in Ghanaian history as the “Golden Stool War” or “Yaa Asantewaa War of 1900.”  J. G. Christaller, Dictionary of the Asante and Fante Language: Called Tschi (Twi), 2nd ed. (Basel: Basel Evangelical Missionary Society, 1933), 153.  The ideal expression “ought to” is used here as a recognition that some agyas (or properly, agyanom) do renege on their socio-cultural responsibility of providing for their families.

5.2 Paradigmatic examples of reception I: Mother-tongue Bible translations

1.

2.

181

the problematic adjective τὸν ἐπιούσιον is captured as “daa.” Daa (as an adverb) has, among others, the meanings of, continually, constantly, always, every day, daily, often, ever, eternally, eternity (i. e. as a noun), etc.⁸⁶² In all these meanings, the sense of a thing lasting (a quality of permanence), staying for a long time or recurring is apparent. Consequently, “daa aduane” becomes food that lasts, that can sustain the individual and community for a long time (in the now and not in the beyond). Repackaging τὸν ἄρτον here as food allows it to fall within the three NT usages of ὁ ἄρτος as discussed in the exegesis above. It was underscored there that the second usage of ὁ ἄρτος has the sense of nourishment and food in the generic sense. It is in this second sense that “aduane” falls. That aside, the translation of τὸν ἐπιούσιον as daa also combines two of the four possible linguistic derivations of the adjective as discussed in the exegetical part. The two in question are, 1) bread for today and 2) bread necessary for our existence. In 1), the aspect of the here and the now is in view and in 2) the aspect of sufficiency is in focus. The second follows from the first and it relates to the translation of bread as food. Translating τὸν ἄρτον as aduane (food) instead of paanoo (the usual word for bread in Twi) allows for a guess that the request should not be mistaken for a specific meal but should be seen as constituting all that nourishes the individual; the nutritional needs of the community. Granted this guess, it implies that the translators would have opted for aduane instead of paanoo because they had the dire economic realities of most Ghanaians in mind.

A final comment on the Twi text pertains to the translation of the second part of the fifth petition as, “na yi yԑn firi bᴐne mu [but remove us from evil]” and the addition of the doxology. The point of interest in the fifth petition is the translation of ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ as “firi bᴐne mu.” Bᴐne being the translation of πονηροῦ is interesting, because it means inter alia, evil, bad, wicked,⁸⁶³ wrongdoing, etc. Indeed, as indicated already in an earlier footnote, the translators provided an interpretation of the petition in a footnote that the petition actually means, “rescue us from the evil one.” Consequently, even though the translation of πονηροῦ as bᴐne captures the sense of the majority usage of the word in Matthew and elsewhere, i. e. in the neuter sense connoting the daily adversities of life, the addition of the footnote allows as to guess that, for the translators, one should

 Christaller, Dictionary of the Asante and Fante Language, 58.  Christaller, p.38

182

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

think of the evil one as being behind any evil. This guess has its support in the context of the previous discussion on the prevailing worldview in Ghana. As was noted there, especially with Gyekye’s submissions in mind, good is caused by Nyame and the good spirits, but evil emanates from bad spirits. In other words, there seems to be a personalised force or rather a spiritual entity behind (every) evil, the chief of which is the evil one. Finally, a comment on the doxology is only meant to reiterate the reason for adding it to the exegeted text above. And certainly, by enclosing it in parentheses, the translators acknowledge its secondariness. (Moreover, one observes that they seemed to have also overlooked the innovative example given by Jacobus Capitein with his Mfantse rendition of the semitic, “Amen,” as “Ojendâm [Let it be so].” The Twi equivalent could have been, ԑnyԑ hᴐ).

5.2.2 The Lord’s Prayer in the Kusaal Bible (2016) The Kusaal language is spoken by the Kusaas,⁸⁶⁴ a major ethnic group in NorthEast of Ghana in the Upper East Region. Within this Region, the important administrative districts within which the language is spoken are, Bawku, Zebilla, Binduri, Tempane, Garu, etc.⁸⁶⁵ Kusaal is listed under the Mabia (Gur) branch of the Niger-Congo language family.⁸⁶⁶ Two identified dialects of Kusaal are the western dialect called Toende Kusaal (which has speakers also in Burkina Faso) and the eastern dialect, Agolle (or Agole) Kusaal (with speakers also in parts of Togo).⁸⁶⁷ Population wise, Kusaal, unlike Twi, claims only about five hundred thousand (500 000) speakers in Ghana.⁸⁶⁸ The Kusaas are largely an agrarian ethnic group cultivating mainly millet (of various types) and rearing livestock and are “divided into numerous patrilineal exogamous clans (dɔ̀ ɔg,

 Also spelled, Kusasi or Kusaase, Kusaasis.  See, Agoswin Musah A., A Grammar of Kusaal: A Mabia (Gur) Language of Northern Ghana, Schriften zur Afrikanistik Research in African Studies 27 (Berlin: Peter Lang, 2018), 25 – 26. Cf. David Eddyshaw, A Grammar of Kusaal: Agolle Dialect (Swansea, 2019), 1– 2, https://www.aca demia.edu/30678520/A_Grammar_of_Kusaal.  Musah, A Grammar of Kusaal, 31. Cf. Eberhard, Simons, and Fennig, Ethnologue: Languages of the World; John Berthelette, ‘Sociolinguistic Survey Report for the Kusaal Language’, SIL International, 2001, 4; Eddyshaw, A Grammar of Kusaal, 5., Haaf, Die Kusase, 10. Also designated as, Mabia (Gur), North Volta-Congo of the Atlantic Congo under the Niger-Congo family.  See Musah, A Grammar of Kusaal, 32– 33. Eddyshaw, A Grammar of Kusaal, 1– 2; Eberhard, Simons, and Fennig, Ethnologue; Berthelette, ‘Sociolinguistic Survey Report for the Kusaal Language’, 4.  See Eberhard, Simons, and Fennig, Ethnologue: Languages of the World.

5.2 Paradigmatic examples of reception I: Mother-tongue Bible translations

183

“hut”)”⁸⁶⁹ with religion permeating every aspect of their lives. The Kusaal Bible provides the earliest and most substantial literary work of the language which also provides the source material for the discussion below. Matt 6:9 – 13 in the Kusaal Bible 2016⁸⁷⁰ Dinzugɔ sɔsimi nԑ anwa, [Because of this pray like this,] ‘Ti Ba’ one be arazana ni, [Our Father who is/dwells in heaven,] ka fʋ yʋ’ʋr mɔr girima, [and your name has glory/honour/respect,]⁸⁷¹ 10 fʋ na’am na kena,⁸⁷² [your chieftaincy/kingdom will come,] ka fʋ bɔɔdim maal dunia zug, [and your will/desire will be done in the universe/world,]⁸⁷³ nwԑnԑ lin maan arezana ni si’em la, [like how it is being done in heaven,]⁸⁷⁴ 11 tisimi ti zina diib [give us today(’s) food]⁸⁷⁵ nwԑnԑ fʋn tisidi ti daar wʋsa si’em la, [like how you give us all day/every day,]⁸⁷⁶ 12 ka di suguru nԑ ti pɔ’ɔgir zug, [and be patient⁸⁷⁷ with our offences/shortcomings,⁸⁷⁸] nwԑnԑ tinamԑ dit suguru nԑ ti taab [like how we (too) are patient with our fellows⁸⁷⁹]⁸⁸⁰ banԑ pɔ’ɔgidi ti si’em la. [who offend/come short of us.]⁸⁸¹ 13 Ka da kԑ ka ti kpԑn’ makir pʋʋginԑ. [and do not allow us to enter into/within trials.]⁸⁸² Amaa yisimi ti yԑlbԑ’ԑd pʋʋgin.’ [However, remove us from within troubles/bad matters.]⁸⁸³

The Kusaal text, unlike the Twi, reveals stronger interpretation urges of the source text than a translation. This is supported by the following comments on some parts of the text. First, the opening petition, namely ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου, is translated as “ka fʋ yʋ’ʋr mɔr girima.” To begin with, the source text has no “ka,” i. e. “and.” Moreover, the translation will sound generally this way in a native speaker’s ear: “and your name has honour/glory/respect.” That is because mɔr means “has” (from “to have”) and girima generally means “hon-

 Eddyshaw, A Grammar of Kusaal, 2.  The corresponding previous 1996 translation is in each case indicated here in the footnotes.  ka fu yu’ur a su’uŋa [and your name is good/(be)fitting].  ka fu na’am na kena [and your kingdom will come].  ka ke ka fu boodim n maal dunia zug, [and let your will/desire be done on the universeworld].  wenne lin maan arazana ni si’em la, [like how it is being done in heaven,].  ka tisi ti zina diib [and give us today food].  wenne fun n tisid ti daar wusa si’em la, [like how you give us all day/every day,].  Or “and exercise patience (…).”  Or “because of our offences/shortcomings (…).”  Or “fellow human beings” or “others.”  wenne tinam dit suguru ne ti taab [like how we too are patient with our fellows].  bane po’ogidi ti si’em la. [who offend/come short of us].  Ka da ke ka ti kpen’ makir poogine. [and do not allow us to enter into/within trials].  Amaa yiisimi ti yelbe’ed poogin.’ [However, remove us from within troubles/bad matters].

184

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

our” or “respect” or “glory” in relation to others or among a group of people. The bearer of girima does not necessarily seek for it but by his/her very person and/ or status s/he naturally commands it from others. Accordingly, in relation to this petition, God’s name is declared as (already) having honour or respect or glory, probably because it is the name of God who is called Wina’am ⁸⁸⁴ (Creator) among the Kusaas.⁸⁸⁵ There is no sense in the translation that indicates that the praying community desires that God should bring respect or honour or glory to his name, but rather that the name already carries honour in these states. Consequently, what can be observed here is not a dynamic equivalence in terms of translation philosophy but an attempt to get at the intended meaning of the petition itself. In the process, the petition is no longer a request but a confession of the state of being of God’s name. Second, the translation of the bread petition, just like the preceding, demonstrates a translation effort that aims at rendering the import of the text. For not only is τὸν ἄρτον translated as “diib,” i. e. food in the generic sense (just like the Twi text), but also the whole petition rendered as, “tisimi ti zina diib, nwԑnԑ fʋn tisidi ti daar wʋsa si’em la” suggests an understanding that God always gives food to the people and on the occasion of praying this petition, it is about God doing what he always does; giving today’s food or giving food today. Put differently, there is in this translation rather a recognition of a usual recurrent divine provision and care for those who depend on him. Here, just as in the Twi text, one observes a here-and-now focus in terms of divine activity of care, it does not seem to suggest future other-worldly understanding of the petition. The third comment pertains to the forgiveness petition. The part of interest is the translation of ἄφες as “di suguru” and τὰ ὀφειλήματα as “pɔ’ɔgir.” To the first, “di suguru.” The verb di means, “to eat,” “to marry” or “to embezzle.” The substantive suguru means “patience” in relation to others, especially in relation to their shortcomings, and, that by extension, forgiveness. To the second, “pɔ’ɔgir” a plural substantive from the verb pɔ’ɔg (to be insufficient, to offend, to belittle), means “insufficiency” or “offence.” It has the sense of being less than required or not up to accepted standard; a shortcoming. Together, these words make the petition sound this way; “and be patient with our shortcomings or offences like how we (too) are patient with our fellows who offend/come short of us.” With this translation, the age-old theological problem associated with the  As Wina’am, God is all powerful and creator/origin of all things such that he is not a direct object of traditional worship among Kusaas just like Nyame among the Akans as earlier indicated. Cf. Haaf, Die Kusase, 21– 22.  See subsection 2.9.2 on the difference between the first petition of the LP and the third petition of the Eighteen Benedictions.

5.2 Paradigmatic examples of reception I: Mother-tongue Bible translations

185

exegetical history of this petition is not tackled, namely whether the human forgiveness is tendered as an example for and reason to demand divine forgiveness.⁸⁸⁶ The interesting thing with the translation is God being asked to be patient with our offences/shortcomings and not our debts which would have been faithful to the Matthean text. Surely, the Kusaas have a word for debt, namely sam (“debt,” sama, “debts”). It seems to me, therefore, better to translate it as, “ka yisi ti sama bas,” i. e. “and remove (throw) our debts away.”⁸⁸⁷ The last comment on the text relates to the last petition: “Ka da kԑ ka ti kpԑn’ makir pʋʋginԑ[,] [a]maa yisimi ti yԑlbԑ’ԑd pʋʋgin [and do not allow us to enter into/within trials, however, remove us from within troubles/bad matters].” Here, just like in the first petition and in the bread petition, one sees a rendering of the point of the text and not the text itself. For καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς is seen as meaning, God preventing the praying community from entering into temptation and not, God not leading them into temptation as the surface of the original text indicates. Such an understanding, I think, sees ὁ πειρασμός in this petition as not the ὁ πειρασμός that emanates from God but from without him and therefore must be avoided. This could be a plausible explanation for giving God a new role in this translation; he is asked to disallow the going into temptation and not (as the source text has it) not to lead people into temptation. That aside, unlike the Twi text above in which the translators footnoted that they conceived τοῦ πονηροῦ as masculine and therefore the evil one, the Kusaal text thinks of τοῦ πονηροῦ in the neuter sense, namely “yԑlbԑ’ԑd,” “troubles/bad matters.” Yԑlbԑ’ԑd has the sense of daily troubles or mishaps that anyone can fall into. This does not certainly mean that the Kusaas do not believe in personified forces or spiritual beings as being behind such mishaps. Certainly, they believe in malevolent forces such as witchcraft, etc. The foregoing indicates that the translation of biblical thoughts from their source languages into receiving languages grants biblical texts, not least that of the Lord’s Prayer, new flavours and meanings in the ears of native speakers of the recipient languages which is reception-historically relevant and interesting. Comparing the Twi and the Kusaal texts, the new state experienced by the mother-tongue translated text comes out clearer in the Kusaal text because of its high interpretational urges. In what follows, however, attention will be shifted to the reception of the text in academic religious-theological discourse in Ghana.

 See subsection 2.9.6 above.  Interestingly, the corresponding Lucan text is translated as follows, “ka yisi ti taali bas, nwԑnԑ tinamԑ kԑt banԑ tʋmmi ti taali basid si’em la,” i. e. “and remove our sins away, like how we let go [the sins of] those who sin against us.”

186

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

5.3 Paradigmatic examples of reception II: academic discussion(s) on the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana The academic reception of the Lord’s Prayer involves both historical exegetical discussions on the text as well as contextual interpretations of it influenced by the Ghanaian socio-cultural and economic contexts within which the interpretations are undertaken. First to be considered is the work of John Ekem on the text. In the previous section, his works, not only on the hermeneutical approach of mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics, but also through this approach, his discussions on early mother-tongue translations of the LP were met. His thoughts there will not be repeated here, only that one of his works on the text gives an interesting interpretation of the text for the Ghanaian context. The work in question which has been cited already is that published by the Journal of African Christian Thought in December 2007, titled, Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutic. From the title of the study, it is immediately clear the approach used for the interpretation of the text: mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics. This hermeneutical approach has been treated above. But it is important to note that this is the method used and through that to be aware of its influences on how he interprets the text for the Ghanaian context. This is necessary because as Beal has intimated, reception historical studies of the Bible also focus on “historically and culturally particular hermeneutical rules that shape and govern the creation of meaning from biblical texts in particular contexts.”⁸⁸⁸ The “hermeneutical rules” is here taken to mean hermeneutical approaches used in the interpretation of biblical texts, hence the initial discussion of the hermeneutical approaches used in biblical studies in Africa. In this work, even though Ekem uses the mother-tongue approach, he precedes it with a historical exegetical analysis of the text. This, as noted above, is part of the mother-tongue approach. In discussing the text, he singles out the bread petition for special focus, so that after exegetical remarks on the text he limits the rest of his interpretation solely to this petition. Consequently, one should discuss his interpretation of it. In accord with his chosen approach, he first presents the translation of the petition in several Ghanaian mothertongue translations of the Bible. Observing from the mother-tongue translations that they hardly bring any new interpretation to the adjective ἐπιούσιος in the petition, he argues,

 Beal, ‘Reception History and Beyond’, 359.

5.3 Paradigmatic examples of reception II

187

Popular and legitimate though the interpretation of ἐπιούσιος as ‘daily bread/food’ might be and expressing (…) trust in God for constant supply of needs, it carries the subtle danger of promoting a ‘living-from-hand-to-mouth syndrome’ (…). But it must also be made clear (…) that what Ghanaians and Africans need is not merely survival based on a subsistence economy, but a leap from mediocrity to economic and moral excellence. This (…) needs to be buttressed by the optimal use of our resources, together with trust in God for wisdom to develop modest but dignified lifestyles that will not make us perpetually dependent on other people’s benevolence. Precisely, a mother-tongue hermeneutic that is relevant to our people will need to apply the biblical text intelligently to the correction of imbalances in society.⁸⁸⁹

In this quote, one finds Ekem’s contextual reading of the petition. In the first place, it is evident that both the hermeneutical approach and the socio-economic context in Ghana seem to influence his interpretation of the petition. This interpretation, as could be seen from the quote, is largely in economic terms entreating policy makers in Ghana (and Africa at large) to ensure through their policies that available resources are well managed so that there will be, 1) significant economic development affording Ghana economic independence from foreign aid and donations and 2) “economic excellence” that will bring a quantum leap from subsistence living-from-hand-to-mouth (which is sadly the case of many Ghanaians as the poverty rate previously stated above suggests) to a “dignified lifestyle.” These results are possible, Ekem seems to suggest, because economic managers will trust God ⁸⁹⁰ for wisdom and that there will be moral excellence developed among the people. In short, what one finds in Ekem’s study of the text is a singling out one petition and dilating hermeneutically on it for the Ghanaian context. His choice of the bread petition is hard to explain, but one could opine that it stems, on the one hand, from his academic interest and on the other hand, from the prevailing not so encouraging economic realities of his Ghanaian context in which he sees the need to apply this biblical text intelligently. Consequently, he retranslates and interprets the bread petition with its hapax legomenon using his mother-

 Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, 51.  The intimation of a nexus between trust in God (i. e. faith, religion) and public service/state governance may appear strange in much of western thought where due to increasing secularisation there is a disconnect between religion and public affairs. But in Ghana and indeed much of Africa such a nexus is normal and desired. It is therefore interesting to see here that Ekem reflects such view in his discussion of the text. For more discussion on the relationship between religion and public space in Ghana, see Kwabena J. Asamoah-Gyadu, ‘“Christ Is the Answer”: What Is the Question?’: A Ghana Airways Prayer Vigil and Its Implications for Religion, Evil and Public Space’, Journal of Religion in Africa 35, no. 1 (2005): 93 – 117.

188

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

tongue, Mfantse, as “Nde so ma hen dza obodo hen so [Today too, give us that which will be sufficient for us]” for Matt 6:11 and “Na daa so ma hen dza obodo hen so [And each day too, give us that which will be sufficient for us]” for Luke 11:3.⁸⁹¹ At the level of reception, the process is a two way one: the first way is the impact of the text as one that could be prophetically used to address persistent hard economic realities of a country and continent and the second way is the impact of the reader on the text which is influenced by the reader’s context; here Ekem’s academic and socio-economic contexts influenced his reception of the text. But he may not be the only one at the academic level to receive the text in this manner, for which reason the discussion should be continued by looking at other academic sources. Another academic study that devotes space to discussing the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana is a doctoral study undertaken by Jonathan Edward Tetteh KuwornuAdjaottor (already cited) titled, Assessment of Three Problematic Texts in the Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament of the Dangme Bible. ⁸⁹² The three synoptic texts in question which he considers problematic based on their current translation in the NT of the Dangme Bible (Ngmami Klᴐuklᴐu ᴐ ⁸⁹³) are Matt 6:12, Mark 1:12 and Luke 24:25. Obviously the first lies in the interest area of this present work. But before discussing it, it is noteworthy that just like Ekem (his mentor), Kuwornu-Adjaottor employs the mother-tongue hermeneutical approach to undertake his assessment. Accordingly, he initially does, as it is usual of the adopted approach, a historical exegetical analysis of the three texts and subsequently problematises their current translations in the Dangme language. His key argument is that the three texts, as they currently stand in the Dangme Bible, are misleading for the Dangme reading communities of the Dangme Bible and therefore require re-translations which he suggests at the end of his study. As indicated, the Matt 6:12 is of interest here and therefore should be discussed now. It is the fifth petition of the LP relating to forgiveness. According to Kuwornu-Adjaottor’s study, the current translation of Matt 6:12 in the Dangme Bible is “Ngᴐᴐ wa tᴐmi ᴐmԑ kԑ pa wᴐ (…) [Lend us our wrong-doings (…)].”⁸⁹⁴ For Kuwornu-Adjaottor, the problem with this translation is rendering ἄφες as, kԑ pa, i. e. “lend” instead of “forgive” or “let go” and the translation of τὰ ὀφειλήματα

 Ekem, ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’, 51.  Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Assessment of Three Problematic Texts in the Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament of the Dangme Bible’.  As published by the Bible Society of Ghana/United Bible Societies in 1999.  Cited in Kuwornu-Adjaottor, ‘Assessment of Three Problematic Texts in the Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament of the Dangme Bible’, 132.

5.3 Paradigmatic examples of reception II

189

as “wrong-doings” instead of “debts.”⁸⁹⁵ The question that consequently arises from such a “thought-for-thought” translation, according to Kuwornu-Adjaottor, is whether God forgives sins/debts or he lends them.⁸⁹⁶ After discussing the problem with this translation with both Dangme scholars (including two surviving members of the translation committee of the Dangme Bible) and the Dangme reading communities, he comes to the conclusion that the text needs a re-translation that will fit into the religio-cultural context of the Dangme people. His proposed new translation, which he recommends to the Bible Society of Ghana for consideration in the next revision of Ngmami Klᴐuklᴐu ᴐ, is, “Ngᴐᴐ wa tᴐmi ᴐmԑ kԑ ke wᴐ kaa bᴐ nԑ waa kԑ kee nihi nԑ tᴐᴐ wa nᴐ [Let go our sins just as we let go the sins of those who wrong us].”⁸⁹⁷ The preceding summarised presentation of the analysis of Kuwornu-Adjaottor allows the following observations to be made in respect of reception. First, given that the approach that he adopted is reader-centred, he comes to this new translation of the text in Dangme based on his understanding of the text from the perspective of the Dangme audience and their religio-cultural background. Second, following from that, one observes in the suggested new translation a leaning towards the Lucan version of the LP than that of the Matthean. Taking together then, one notices the impact of the reading communities on the text in terms of reception, such that in order for them to well appreciate the point of the text, it is better to render it in their religio-cultural categories. If one compares the previous discussion on contextual factors and hermeneutical approaches that influence reception of texts and this discussion of Ekem and Kuwornu-Adjaottor’s works, it is self-evident that religio-cultural considerations and chosen hermeneutical approaches are influential in the reception of (biblical) texts in a given context. Aside Ekem and Kuwornu-Adjaottor, Joyce Afia Adubea Mintah adds to the discussion of the LP in the Ghanaian context with her M.Phil. thesis of 2014 which she submitted to the Department for the Study of Religions at the University of Ghana, Legon.⁸⁹⁸ In this thesis, she attempts, following conventional exe-

 Kuwornu-Adjaottor, 132.  Kuwornu-Adjaottor, 109, 132.  Kuwornu-Adjaottor, 146.  Joyce Afia Adubea Mintah, ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus Christ: A Study of the Gospel of Luke’ (Master of Philosophy Thesis, Accra, University of Ghana Legon, 2014). Later in 2017, Frederick Kotey Ashaley, then an M.Div. student/seminarian at the Trinity Theological Seminary, Legon, Accra, submits a thesis with almost the same title as Mintah’s and dealing with the same texts in Luke as Mintah: ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus: A Study of Luke’s Gospel’ (Master of Divinity Thesis, Accra, Trinity Theological Seminary Legon, 2017).

190

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

getical methods, to “analyse how prayer forms an integral aspect in the life and ministry of Jesus” in Luke’s Gospel by exegeting Luke 11:1– 8 (with reference to Luke 18:1– 14).⁸⁹⁹ The analysis of Lucan theology of prayer in relation to Jesus and subsequently his disciples is, for Mintah, not an end in and of itself. For, lending credence to the observation by Gerald West (as cited above) of the nature of biblical hermeneutics in Africa as one that is always aimed at changing the African context, Mintah follows her exegesis with contextual application of the chosen texts to neo-Pentecostal/Charismatic⁹⁰⁰ prayer ethos. Accordingly, her entire study finds clear expression in the application part. Within her analysis, the Lucan Lord’s Prayer functions as a key to “understanding (…) Luke’s vision of prayer in the ministry of Jesus.”⁹⁰¹ Through her exegesis of the LP and the related parables on prayer, she underscores that Lucan theology of prayer is built on relationship towards the Father and through that relationship towards others (for relationship to the Father requires simultaneous relationship to fellow humans) and it encourages boldness and persistence enduring till one’s requests are met.⁹⁰² She lays more emphasis on the communal dimension of prayer (insofar as prayer is to the Father and a relationship with him) and stresses the need for this understanding of prayer to shape relationship towards others, non-Christians inclusive. Moreover, at the exegetical level, she is of the view that the differentiation between the Matthean and Lucan LP, inter alia, is that while the former is “an example” of prayer, the latter is “a model of prayer” for the Christian community “in all circumstance.”⁹⁰³ This conception of the LP is important for the discussion, because later in the discussion of the text in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity, the point will be made that this Christianity hardly liturgically use the LP because it considers it as a model of prayer. Before then, however, it is important to note that Mintah does not carry her “model of prayer” conception farther than indicating that it is the differentiating⁹⁰⁴ mark between the two versions in the Gospel traditions.

Whereas Mintah’s thesis looks into the LP and the general prayer theology of Luke with the view to informing the prayer praxis of Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity, Ashaley with the same texts widens the scope of application of his work to the prayer praxis of Christians in general in Ghana. For this reason, his work is not discussed here as it exhibits the same features as Mintah’s.  See the Abstract to the thesis, Mintah, ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus Christ’.  See the previous part for more information on this stream of Christianity in Ghana.  Mintah, ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus Christ’, 44.  Mintah, 44, 52, 125, 128.  Mintah, 32– 33, 126.  To dichotomize the two versions in terms of one being an “example of prayer” and the other a “model of prayer” is hardly tenable in my view. For I will rather contend that both designations

5.3 Paradigmatic examples of reception II

191

She concludes from her exegesis of the chosen texts that Lucan discourse on prayer emphasises prayer as a relationship, i. e. with the Father and with others. She exhorts accordingly, “It is expected that the understanding of Luke’s vision of prayer will help shape the attitudes of believers toward God and their fellow men.”⁹⁰⁵ She applies this understanding critically to the Charismatic Christian prayer praxis in Ghana. Under the revealing subsections “4.4 Luke and Contemporary Charismatics’ Style of Prayer” and “4.5 How Luke’s Style of Prayer Challenges Contemporary Ghanaian Christianity” she juxtaposes Lucan theology of prayer with neo-Pentecostal prayer praxis by drawing similarities and criticising differences.⁹⁰⁶ For instance, she underscores a connection between prayer and the Spirit in both Luke and Charismatic Christianity. At the same time, using Luke as a yardstick, she criticises Charismatic prayer praxis as being vindictive or imprecatory⁹⁰⁷ whereas forgiveness and love for the neighbour are central to Lucan understanding of prayer.⁹⁰⁸ She argues, “Luke’s style of prayer teaches us to love and care for the other in the community. We [are] admonished to love each other and forgive those who hurt us. But then in the context of the Charismatics, prayers are inveighed against those who are suspected to be behind one’s predicament.”⁹⁰⁹ Moreover, based on her understanding that Luke’s theology of prayer emphasises personal relationship to a loving Father and a caring friend, she criticises a contemporary phenomenon in Charismatic Christianity in Ghana in which “self-proclaimed ‘men of God’ (…) take money from people, deceiving them while promising to pray for them.”⁹¹⁰ This exists because, “Usually most victims [of this phenomenon] consider their problems as spiritually-based and believe that they could be solved by special prayers offered by pastors [i. e. the

—example and model—apply rather more to the Matthean version because of the context of the LP in Matthew, and also Matthew’s use of Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς to introduce it. In Luke’s case, giving the LP as a response to the disciple’s request to be taught to prayer and not how to pray (of course, it entails that) makes it hardly a model (or even an example). For, “Whenever you pray, say (…)” suggests a given prayer to be repeated and given the request in Luke 11:1b, one should think here of a prayer that marks the disciples out in terms of identity. See, Hagner, Matthew 1 – 13, 120.  Mintah, ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus Christ’, 125.  Mintah, 100 – 101.  In the previous parts, mention was made of this in discussing Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Ghana.  Mintah, ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus Christ’, 100 – 101.  Mintah, 101.  Mintah, 103.

192

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

‘men of God’].”⁹¹¹ If prayer is a personal relationship to a loving Father and a caring friend, then this phenomenon has no basis as the “victims” could make their problems directly known to the loving Father, Mintah seems to suggest. Another interesting critique of Charismatic Christian prayer praxis in Ghana emanating from her interpretation of Lucan theology of prayer is, Luke’s usage of plural imperatives in the Lord’s Prayer adds a communal aspect to prayer. This structure demonstrates the significance of putting the needs of the community above our own personal needs. Primarily, the trends of prayers we observe today [i. e. in Charismatic Christianity] are often self-centered (…) on personal needs, desires, concerns and family. It can be [therefore] argued that the communal dimension of [prayer] in our society is (…) missing.⁹¹²

The “self-centered” nature of Charismatic prayers, she further argues, is also revealed in loud prayers which regard less of the impact on neigbours. Mintah in this regard is strong on the view that Charismatic loud prayers can be disturbing and irritating for others who live around Charismatic churches. Therefore, for her, Luke’s communal understanding of prayers requires that Charismatics “care about others” including non-Christians in the exercise of their religious rights.⁹¹³ Finally, another feature of neo-Pentecostal prayer ethos that Minta will have Luke correct is the promises of earthly blessings from God for its adherents such as riches, health, long-life, children, etc., which should be received through prayer among others. But when there is a delay in receiving these blessings, adherents tend to visit other churches or sources for such things. For Mintah, in this regard, “Luke’s vision of prayer challenges this understanding of prayer amongst the Charismatics, because he instructs us to persevere in prayer, regardless of how long it takes.”⁹¹⁴ The foregoing, consequently, allows the following reception related observations of Mintah’s study on the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana at an academic level to be made. First, one perceives that the Lord’s Prayer and the other prayer related texts in Luke constitute divine or say ‘sacral yardstick’ for judging contemporary Ghanaian (and African) neo-Pentecostal/Charismatic prayer ethos. This gives credence to the belief in Ghanaian Christianity (more pronounced in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity) that the Bible (as a whole) is the timeless Word of God and therefore authoritative in sanctioning Christian faith and praxis. To that extent, it could be used as a corrective for Christian practices that are at var   

Mintah, 103. Mintah, 108. Emphasis added. Mintah, 112. Mintah, 122 – 23. Emphasis added.

5.3 Paradigmatic examples of reception II

193

iance with its teachings. Precisely this is what Mintah is doing with her study on the Lord’s Prayer. Second, following from the first, Mintah’s handling of the LP suggests that it constitutes a standard prayer model that provides orientation for all Christian prayer praxis. This is interesting because, as already indicated, later below, the point will be made in relation to Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity that it understands the function of the LP in the same manner. Mintah’s reception of the text, in sum, is seen in how she applies it as a corrective to Charismatic prayer ethos. Lastly, John Kwesi Addo Jnr.’s research on the bread petition of the LP (just like Ekem) provides another academic source for consideration.⁹¹⁵ But unlike Ekem (and indeed Kuwornu-Adjaottor and Mintah), Addo Jnr. adopts a liberation hermeneutical approach to interpret the bread petition for a chosen Ghanaian context, namely Gomoa Potsin, the capital town of the Gomoa East District in the Central Region of Ghana. Within this study, which he presented as a Master of Theology thesis to the Trinity Theological Seminary, he explores, through a community Bible study group in Gomoa Potsin and personal interviews, the potential implication of the bread petition from a liberation hermeneutical perspective for the lived social realities of poverty and hunger in the chosen research context (and by extension the entire country).⁹¹⁶ Even though Addo Jnr. undertakes a critical exegesis of the petition (Matt 6:11) and looks at its translation in various Ghanaian mother-tongue Bibles (i. e. Ga, Ewe and Mfantse), his dominant approach is liberation hermeneutics. According to him, “In this study liberation is envisaged to be from the economic and political structures which have kept some indigenes of Gomoa Potsin and to a large extent some Ghanaians in hunger and poverty.”⁹¹⁷ Accordingly and characteristic of the adopted approach,⁹¹⁸ he interprets the text from the standpoint of the hungry and poor in Potsin. To make his liberation point clear through the text, he initially draws attention to the poverty and hunger situations in, not only Ghana, but also across the world vis-à-vis the increased global wealth and food production. For instance, not only does he quote statistics on poverty and hunger in Ghana and in the world, but he also quotes some of his respondents as

 John Kwesi Addo Jnr., ‘“Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread”: An Exegetical Study of Matthew 6:11 in the Light of Poverty Experience in Gomoa Potsin in the Central Region of Ghana’ (Master of Theology Thesis, Accra, Trinity Theological Seminary Legon, 2015).  Addo Jnr., 6 – 7.  Addo Jnr., 79.  See subsection 4.2.4 above in respect of liberation hermeneutics.

194

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

saying, “I did not know what my family and I would eat that afternoon [referring to the day of interview] and the subsequent evening.”⁹¹⁹ A liberation hermeneutical approach, therefore, allows Addo Jnr. and his respondents to interpret the petition largely in socio-economic categories. The τὸν ἄρτον being asked for is not only bread in terms of food, but also economic resources for acquiring bread and breaking off the yoke of hunger and poverty.⁹²⁰ Certainly, he and some of his respondents see a spiritual and eschatological dimension to the bread being asked for (because the petition, to him, is directed to God in the first place and bread has symbolic meanings in the NT),⁹²¹ yet it does not reduce the predominance of the material understanding. Construing τὸν ἄρτον as economic resources, Addo Jnr. argues (for his respondents) that, “In contemporary Gomoa Potsin, one may like to stretch Matthew 6:11 to be contextually restated as ‘give us today our daily economic resources’ which invariably would mean give us today our daily bread, because the availability of bread to a person today is determined by economic resources available to him or her.”⁹²² “Give us this day our daily economic resources” is not different from what one of his respondents said regarding his understanding of the petition, namely “(…) give all of us strength for daily life. Give us this day our daily work.”⁹²³ Behind this understanding should be seen the influence of the liberation approach adopted, according to which socio-economic and political structures must be critically engaged for the benefit of the poor and hungry. If the petition is understood as economic resources, then the following questions need to be asked: who is (obligated) to provide these? And who are the recipients? Beginning with the latter question, Addo Jnr. sees the plural personal pronouns (“us” and “our”) in the petition as representing, liberation hermeneutically stating, the poor and hungry who are making the call, first to God because he has control over all the resources of the world, and second and more concretely to state actors, namely governments and their representatives who control and manage the national resources of Ghana. He contends as follows, From a liberation perspective, the powerful in Society, the controllers of the world resources, controllers of country resources and managers of community resources and those who manipulate the economic systems of the world are those to whom (…) this petition is made (…). Specifically, political office holders and business concerns who hold huge market shares, they are the ones to hear the almost incessant cry of the poor and provide them

    

Addo Addo Addo Addo Addo

Jnr., ‘“Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread”’, 82. Jnr., 85 – 91. Jnr., 85 – 87. Jnr., 91. Jnr., 102.

5.3 Paradigmatic examples of reception II

195

with their daily bread. The recipient of the petition (…) can be extended to include all in society who have more than they need.⁹²⁴

Consequently, pre-empting how this petition could be answered in this context, he advocates not only for agency⁹²⁵ on the part of the hungry and poor (i. e. the “us” and “our”) to “reject any relationship of exploitation,”⁹²⁶ but more importantly also for the controllers and resource managers mentioned above to re-adjust economic and political systems to ensure fair distribution of economic resources for the poor and hungry to acquire the means of getting out of their socio-economic quagmires.⁹²⁷ Such means could be jobs, re-training, information on access to government interventions, etc.⁹²⁸ In summary, Addo Jnr.’s liberative interpretation of the bread petition of the LP permits the following observations. First, just like the preceding three authors, he adopts a particular hermeneutical approach which consequently influences his particular reception of the text. Here, liberation biblical hermeneutics is used and it is interesting the results that issue from it. For example, the bread petition, in this regard, provides a divine basis and an advocacy text for articulating the concerns of the hungry and poor. The petition is understood largely from their perspective. Second, the text is used within a liberation hermeneutic to confront unjust political and economic systems as well as the human faces behind them demanding their re-adjustment for the alleviation of the plight of the hungry and the poor. Additionally, if one were to ask why the choice of a liberation approach in interpreting the text for the Ghanaian context, a plausible response will be the poverty level of the chosen context with a distant answer being that biblical interpretation in Ghana (and Africa), as already underscored, is not an end in and of itself but a means to, in the words of Ekem (already cited), “the correction of imbalances in society.” Accordingly, the petition must be seen in light of its liberative interpretation, re-expressed as “give us today our daily economic resources.” One sees in this connection, both impact and effect of the text and of the readers: on the one hand, the text functions as a divine clarion call on behalf of the hungry and poor, and on the other hand, the readers see in it their socio-economic realities being reflected and therefore it must be made to re-speak anew articulating accurately their experience, thus the re-readings stated above.     

Addo Addo Addo Addo Addo

Jnr., 95 – 96. Jnr., 116. Jnr., 108. Jnr., 109. Jnr., 118.

196

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

From the foregoing, the academic reception of the text in Ghana is multidimensional which is largely the result of the different hermeneutical approaches used on the text by the various authors discussed. From a mother-tongue hermeneutical perspective, Ekem is seen considering the text with its bread petition in largely material terms and advancing for governmental policies that will ensure efficient maximisation of resources to enhance living standards in Ghana. With the same hermeneutical principle, focusing on the fifth petition, Kuwornu-Adjaottor argues for a re-translation of the text to fit the religio-cultural background of the Dangmes, his research target group. Mintah sees the text as providing a model of Christian prayer to which neo-Pentecostal churches in Ghana must re-adjust their prayer ethos. Lastly, Addo Jnr., coming from a liberation hermeneutical perspective to the text, sees specifically the bread petition as economic resources that resource managers at various levels of the Ghanaian society need to well manage for the benefit of the hungry and poor in Ghana. From this academic appropriation of the text, the discussion shifts now to the liturgical context.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use Liturgical appropriations of the LP are well documented and probably presents the clearest traceable reception of the text. Indeed, there is scholarly consensus that its Sitz im Leben in the early church was in the liturgy (aside catechism).⁹²⁹ In contemporary global Christian contexts, the same liturgical appropriation of the text can be seen in specifically Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox circles. However, the same might not be exactly applicable to, for instance, the new forms of Christianity like Pentecostal Christianity and its sub-streams. Consequently, if one were to pose the question as to how the LP is received liturgically within the different streams of Christianity that were previously discussed, two possible answers could be given, namely that in mainline Christianity it appears in church liturgy and catechism, but in, for instance, Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity (the largest stream) it is hardly seen. Therefore, in the following subsections attention will be given to how the LP is received in the churches which use it and why it is hardly used liturgically in Pentecostal-Charismatic churches. In addition, an accompanying point of discussion will be to answer the question whether there could be other non-liturgical appropriations of the text in PCCs.

 See subsection 2.6 above.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

197

5.4.1 The Lord’s Prayer in mainline Christianity There are many churches that fall under this stream of Christianity.⁹³⁰ As a result, one can hardly deal here with the manner of liturgical and catechetical appropriation of the text in all of them. Therefore, what will be done here is to pick one of them as a case study to depict the manner of appropriation of the text in mainline Christianity in Ghana. The chosen mainline church here is the Presbyterian Church of Ghana (PCG). The reason for the choice is simply because it is the oldest continuing existing church in Ghana. Two sources provide answer(s) to the question regarding liturgical and catechetical appropriation of the LP in the PCG: the (English) Catechism⁹³¹ and the PCG Worship Books.⁹³² While the latter provides information pertaining to the location(s) of the LP in the Presbyterian liturgy, the former provides not only the use of the text in the Presbyterian doctrinal instruction, but also and more interestingly, the Presbyterian interpretation of the text. It is termed here as the ‘Presbyterian interpretation’ because under the section on Catechism dealing with the LP, explanations as to what each part of the text means are given which catechumen must learn by rote. Some of them will be shortly looked at. Before then, however, attention will first be given to the Worship Books to see the liturgical application of the text. The Presbyterian Worship Book (PWB) contains orders of service for a variety of occasions. The occasions include, the usual Sunday forenoon or evening service, celebration of the Lord’s Supper, baptism and confirmation, commissioning and ordination of ministers, marriage ceremony, induction of other officers of the Church such as Moderator and Clerk of the General Assembly of the PCG, etc. Being part of the worldwide family of Reformed Churches,⁹³³ the PCG participates in the Reformed Worship (or Liturgy) which an erstwhile Moderator of the Church, Rt. Rev. Dr. Yaw Frimpong, has explained in the preface to the PWB to mean, “(…) a type of worship that is according to scripture, according to the pattern of the Apostolic Church, revived [during] the Reformation. (…) it

 See subsection 3.4.1 above.  The current Presbyterian English Catechism is a translation and expansion of the old Catechism which exists in Twi and Ga.  Beyond the Catechism and the Worship Books, the LP is also printed as part of the Presbyterian Hymn Book, just like one can find in the German Evangelisches Gesangbuch.  That’s the World Communion of Reformed Churches (WCRCs).

198

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

is (…) simple, spiritual, and reverent, feature[ing] prominently systematic preaching, singing, free prayer and uses some fixed forms.”⁹³⁴ The Presbyterian liturgy for Sunday morning has three main parts, the first being approach to God, second means of grace and third response to God’s Word.⁹³⁵ The theological underpinning of this structure is obvious: God is supreme and holy and there must be an appropriate way to approach him and, granted his mercy and love, he turns graciously through the scriptures and sacraments to all who seek him through Jesus Christ by the Sprit, and the worshippers, to their own benefit, are to respond to this gracious divine attention in the liturgy. Against this theological background of the Presbyterian liturgy, the LP appears as one of the “fixed forms” in the first part (i. e. the approach to God) and in the first session of prayer on the order of service⁹³⁶ ending the prayer of inspiration with (inter alia) the saying, “Help us to yield totally to your will through Jesus Christ our Lord, who taught us to pray saying, Our Father (…).” In this light, the LP functions, on the one hand, as the prayer of all prayers said under the given prayer session and on the other hand, as part of the means which constitute the appropriate manners of approaching God.⁹³⁷ An associated question of interest for this study is the form of the text recited after “(…) Jesus Christ our Lord, who taught us to pray saying (…).” This question will be addressed in connection with the discussion on the Presbyterian English Catechism (PEC). The PEC is understood by the PCG as “(…) a teaching material to promote and guide the study of the Scriptures” which “Parents, teachers and other instructors are encouraged to use it to prepare children and the youth for a life of faith in Jesus Christ (…).”⁹³⁸ It finds its maximum use in the “preparation of candidates for baptism and confirmation in the Church [i. e. the PCG].”⁹³⁹ Ultimately, the PEC is regarded (at least from the perspective of Rt. Rev. Prof. Emma-

 Frimpong-Manso, Yaw, in the Preface to Presbyterian Church of Ghana, Worship Book: Ordinances (Accra: Waterville Publ. House, 2010), iv. Emphases added.  Presbyterian Church of Ghana, 4– 9.  The liturgy has two sessions for prayers, the second being “intercession and supplication” which comes sometime after the sermon. When celebrating the Lord’s Supper as part of the normal Sunday morning order, however, the position of the LP moves from the first part of approach to God to the second part of means of grace. It is said right before the institution of the sacrament.  During the Lord’s Supper, the function of the text changes to being part of the means which constitute an appropriate manner of approaching the Lord’s table/supper.  Presbyterian Church of Ghana, The English Catechism (Accra: Waterville Publ. House, 2015), ix.  Presbyterian Church of Ghana, vii.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

199

nuel Martey, a past Moderator) “as a critical tool in disciple-making” in the PCG.⁹⁴⁰ Within this understanding and goal (that the PEC should serve), the LP is introduced as part of the contents of the PEC (among others like the Apostles’ Creed, the Decalogue, the Lord’s Supper, etc.). If in the PWB the LP is the prayer of all prayers and functions as part of appropriate manners of approaching God in worship, here in the PEC, it answers the question, “What does our Lord Jesus Christ teach about prayer?”⁹⁴¹ Tellingly, the LP is conceived then as constitutive of Jesus’s instruction on the Christian discipline of prayer. One can infer from this conception a leaning towards the Lucan context where the LP for Luke is Jesus’s answer to the request of the disciple to δίδαξον ἡμᾶς προσεύχεσθαι (“teach us to pray”).⁹⁴² In addition, an interesting aspect of this conception is that it bears (albeit remotely) a semblance to Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity’s understanding of the LP as Jesus’s model teaching on prayer meant to inform the believers’ own prayer. However, while here, mainline Christianity (with the PCG as an example) will recite it, there in PentecostalCharismatic Christianity, it will not be recited! The reasons as to why will be seen later below. Mention was made earlier of the translation of the text used in the PCG within these materials. It is as follows: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be Thy Name; Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil: For Thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, forever and ever. Amen.⁹⁴³

Given this form, which is largely Matthean than Lucan, a couple of comments are necessary before continuing the discussion. First, one observes in the fifth petition, i. e. the forgiveness petition, two things: 1) even though the whole text is Matthean, with this petition, however, one notices, with the use of “trespasses” an influence of Matt 6:14– 15 where Matthew himself abandons τὰ ὀφειλήματα (debts) for τὰ παραπτώματα (trespasses). And as indicated under the textual criticism, this was the preference of Origen; 2) the formulation of the petition here abandons the Matthean, “(…) forgive us our debts as we have forgiven

 Presbyterian Church of Ghana, vii.  Presbyterian Church of Ghana, 6.  Luke 11:1b. One could even translate it as, “teach us to pray regularly,” given the presence (middle) aspect of the infinitive.  Presbyterian Church of Ghana, The English Catechism, 6. Emphases added.

200

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

our debtors” for the more Lucan, “(…) as we forgive them that trespass⁹⁴⁴ against us.” Second, one sees in the second part of the last petition “evil” instead of “the evil one” as used in the exegetical part of this study. Nevertheless, it does not prevent the PCG from understanding it as “the evil one.” Lastly, one sees here the threefold doxology. What then is the Presbyterian interpretation of the text? In answer to this, some responses from the PEC to questions asking what each petition means will be quoted in the table below. Table 4: The Lord’s Prayer in the Presbyterian English Catechism Question

Answer

What does, “Our Father who art in heaven” mean?

“In this part of the prayer, Our Lord Jesus (…) assures us that God is our Father and we are His true children; therefore (…) we continually rely on His divine providence, and as obedient children, expectantly look up to our Father (…).”⁹⁴⁵

What does “Thy will be done on earth, as “In this prayer (…) we desire that God will make us it is in heaven” mean? able and willing to know, obey and submit to His will in all things, as the angels in Heaven.”⁹⁴⁶ What does “Give us this day our daily bread” mean?

“In this petition (…) we pray that, of God’s free gift, we may receive daily a competent portion of the good things of this life and enjoy them as blessings from Him.”⁹⁴⁷

What does “and lead us not into tempta- “In this petition, (…) we recognise that, even tion, but deliver us from evil” mean? though God does not lead anyone into temptation, we must plead with him to protect us from Satan, the world and our passion that tempt and deceive us into disobedience and sin. We (…) seek to be empowered to overcome all temptations (…).” ⁹⁴⁸

These responses are to be given by catechumen to the questions. They provide interesting details worth commenting as follows. 1. The Presbyterian understanding of the invocation is that God is presented as Father with a simultaneous implication that the catechumen are “true chil    

Of course, Luke does not use “trespass” instead the verbal form of “debt”. Presbyterian Church of Ghana, The English Catechism, 6. Emphases added. Presbyterian Church of Ghana, 7. Emphases added. Presbyterian Church of Ghana, 7. Emphasis added. Presbyterian Church of Ghana, 8. Emphasis added.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

2.

3.

4.

201

dren.” Likewise, being Father means that God has duty to provide for these true children who also in return must be “obedient children.” By implication, therefore, divine Fatherhood of God ‘imposes’ divine responsibility on both God and the catechumen. The second petition is understood as focusing on divine enablement of the catechumen to do divine will. Interestingly, doing divine will is coterminous with being like the angels in this regard. Furthermore, the Presbyterian understanding of the bread petition is rather fascinating. To begin with, one observes a material, this-worldly interpretation of the petition as “the good things of this life.” This broad (open-ended) understanding of the petition allows for all imaginable human material needs and wants to be included in the interpretation of τὸν ἄρτον (bread). In addition, there is a measure as to how much of “the good things of this life” is to be given: “daily a competent portion.” It is unclear what “competent” here means, but one could guess that it has more to do with sufficiency. Granted this, the petition is about asking for a daily provision of sufficient material things that afford a comfortable living for the believers in the here and now. Noteworthy is that this interpretation excludes outrightly any eschatological meaning(s). It is understandable why that is the case, for within a context where hunger and poverty rates are relatively high, it bears to believe in the Father who has capacity to provide, not just a dish —bread in the limited sense—but the means to a quality livelihood. Finally, the interpretation of the last petition is remarkable. As initially indicated, even though the translation of the text used opts for “evil” instead of “the evil one,” the interpretation has no difficulty in recognising that the Satan and all that he stands for is in view here. Yet, it also acknowledges the inward origination of evil, namely “our passion.” Consequently, the petition from the Presbyterian point of view, first absolves God of any role in leading the catechumen into temptation⁹⁴⁹ by consigning the source of temptation to the Satan, the world and human passions. Accordingly, the Father’s help is rather sought to withstand these three sources of temptation.

Taking together, the Presbyterian interpretation of the LP is more situated to the lived reality of the believer and, because of that, very practical and largely thisworldly; it excludes any eschatological, futuristic, other-worldly understanding. The use of the text is twofold: 1) as a liturgical material it is the prayer of all prayers which is part of the fixed liturgical forms and appropriate manners of ap-

 See the section on the Kusaal Bible translation of the petition.

202

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

proaching God in worship and 2) as a foundational instructional text on the Christian discipline of prayer. One could, with some case-specific modifications, extrapolate this Presbyterian reception of the text to the rest of mainline Christianity. For liturgically and catechistically, the text finds use in the rest of the mainline churches, be it in the Roman Catholic Church—where the LP comes during the Eucharist before the elements are served,⁹⁵⁰ Anglican, Methodist Church Ghana, Evangelical Presbyterian Church(es), etc. Data on this is readily accessible in written forms available in respective liturgical and catechetical books. But that is hardly the case with African Instituted Christianity (AIC).

5.4.2 The Lord’s Prayer in African instituted Christianity Because there are hardly many written materials in this stream of Christianity unlike in mainline and Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianities, limited personal interviews were used to gain the information presented in this subsection. Two key informants on the question of the LP in AIC were Rev. Prof. Thomas A. Oduro and Rev. Frank Botchway both of whom work at the Good News Theological College and Seminary (GNTCS), Accra-Ghana, an institution that trains leaders and members of AICs. While Prof. Oduro is the President of the GNTCS, Rev. Botchway is its Chief Librarian. The choice of both, aside the use of opportunity sampling, was that both are pastors and members of AICs, and Oduro has researched and written on AICs. In addition, according to him (Oduro), he has been a member of an AIC for about forty years and has visited many AICs in Ghana, other parts of Africa and abroad. His current church is “Christ Holy Church.” Botchway has also visited several AICs aside his own, “Osamadi Church of the Light,” an AIC which his father (Samuel Dankwa) founded in 1935 as a break away from the Methodist Church Ghana. Regarding the LP in AIC, both Oduro and Botchway concur that, unlike in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity, it finds liturgical use in AICs. Both further intimate that much importance is accorded the LP in AICs because it is the Lord’s Prayer—a prayer taught by the Lord himself. According to Oduro, In all the years I have I spent ([i. e.] more than forty years) being an AIC member, I do not think I have gone to worship with any AIC that does not [use] the Lord’s Prayer. I have worshipped with AICs not only in Ghana but also in about ten other African countries. Wher-

 On 14 October 2018, I joined the Mass at St. Thomas Aquinas Catholic Church on Legon Campus, Accra as part of the fieldwork for this study. The LP was recited as described above but without the doxology.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

203

ever [I] go, the Lord’s Prayer is a key element in the worship of AICs. The fact that it is called the Lord’s Prayer is why we [i. e. AICs] [consider] it so important, [for] this is the prayer that Jesus Christ himself taught us (…) it is not a prayer [of] any bishop or any prophet.⁹⁵¹

In the same vein, Botchway stresses, “Almost in all their [i. e. AICs’] gatherings and worship, it [i. e. the LP] is there.”⁹⁵² To the question of which point in AICs’ worship the LP finds use, Oduro relates that it is recited (and in some cases sang⁹⁵³) after what he termed “Adoration Prayer.”⁹⁵⁴ The adoration prayer, according to him, centres on God as Creator and Sustainer of all things and on forgiveness of sins as well as intercession. The LP then follows afterwards. While in the AICs known to Oduro the LP locates itself at this early part of the order of service, in those known to Botchway, the LP comes right before the benediction, namely before the close of worship. Moreover, Botchway adds that during a celebration of the Lord’s Supper, the text moves from this position to after the institution of the sacrament but before participation in the sacrament.⁹⁵⁵ Aside the liturgical reception, Oduro states that in the AIC context known to him, the text finds limited liturgical use in what he called Children’s Sunday School. This is a separate worship service on Sundays for children in which the children are also taught some basics about Christianity. The foregoing insight on the LP in African Instituted Christianity permits the observation that the reception of the text in this Christianity, based on the data above, is similar to that in mainline Christianity as already presented. For instance, the liturgical use both within Eucharistic and non-Eucharistic services is reminiscent of the case in mainline Christianity. The logical question then is the source of this influence. The immediate answer (a historical one) which is also confirmed by Botchway is that because many of the AICs historically emerged from mainline churches, they carried with them some mainline ecclesiastical traditions especially liturgical traditions. In agreement, Botchway discloses that, “Most of the AICs broke away from the mainline churches, like my father’s church [i. e. the Osamadi, Church of Light] came out of the Methodist Church. [Therefore], the liturgy is well preserved [in their worship with the addition of] few other things [which] were [initially] not [present from the mainline source]. The main components are, [however, maintained].”⁹⁵⁶ The “main components”  Personal interview with Thomas Oduro, Accra, 24 October 2018.  Personal interview with Botchway, Accra, 24 October 2018.  For instance, in his current church, Christ Holy Church, it is sung, led by a choir.  Personal interview with Thomas Oduro, Accra, 24 October 2018.  Certainly, Oduro relates that the text is used during the Lord’s Supper in the AICs known to him.  Personal interview with Frank Botchway, Accra, 24 October 2018.

204

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

here being the same as the “fixed forms” of the Presbyterian liturgy discussed above which includes the Lord’s Prayer. The picture, however, looks different when attention is turned to Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity (PCC).

5.4.3 The Lord’s Prayer in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity As initially stated, the LP hardly finds liturgical use in PCC in the manner that it does in mainline Christianity as could be seen in the example of the PCG and in AICs. However, the non-liturgical appropriation of the text in PCC is not suggestive of its irrelevance. Therefore, under this sub-section, two questions regarding the LP in PCC will be addressed. The first question is why the LP hardly plays a prominent liturgical role in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christian praxis? The second is whether it finds other ways of appropriation in PCC? Beginning with the first interrogation, the initial point made in Part II (i. e. chapter 3) about prayer in PCC needs to be recalled. There, it was noted that in this stream of Christianity prayer generally must be original, long, sustained and spontaneous. Because of this understanding of prayer, especially it being long, spontaneous and original, PCC does not think that prayers should be written down and read out or recited as the case is in mainline Christianity. Being original and spontaneous means that prayer should not have been initially written down either by the one praying or by another person for the one praying. For example, the liturgical practice in mainline Christianity where prayers are read out from liturgical books is simply out of place for PCC. The data that provides this information falls into written materials (popular literature) from PCC and oral data in terms of personal interviews with some leaders in PCC. For instance, according to Apostle Prof. Opoku Onyinah, a recent past Chairman of the Church of Pentecost, the reason why the LP and by extension all written prayers are not preferred in Pentecostal Christianity is, Pentecostals do not usually like written prayers. In fact, even in most cases, if you write a prayer and read it out, they [i. e. Pentecostal Christians] think you are not spiritual (…). If some of them see a leader reading [out] a prayer, they may become offended. [Because] they [do not] think that as a Pentecostal one should write and read out a prayer. What they really like is you speaking out the prayer without writing it. The one who does that is considered spiritual.⁹⁵⁷

 Personal Interview with Opoku Onyinah (via Skype from) London, 13 November 2018.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

205

This excerpt from a personal interview with him on this present subject is revealing in two ways. First, one notes that the dislike for written prayers is not just the result of a penchant for spontaneous, original prayers, but also—which is the second point—because of the notion of spirituality, namely that the one who makes spontaneous prayers is spiritual. Spiritual here should be understood in Pentecostal categories as being Holy Spirit filled and through that being able to demonstrate divine power. Within this line of thinking, the LP is not used liturgically because that will mean it has been written down, internalised and recited by heart excluding any room for spontaneity. And precisely that will be unfitting for Pentecostal-Charismatic understanding of prayer. In another personal interview with, this time, a Charismatic pastor, Apostle Dr. Ebenezer Adjei,⁹⁵⁸ the LP is not to be recited in Pentecostal-Charismatic worship because, (…) I [do not] think Jesus wants us to recite to God [a prayer] he has taught so that it will [appear as] his prayer we are [re]telling God. It’s like a child being told by the mother to (…) tell the father that “I love you.” (…) Then the child (…) says [to the father], “mummy says I love you.” [In this case,] it doesn’t come from the child (…) [but] from the mother. But if the child by his own volition (…) tells the father that “I love you daddy,” then he uses his own means (…) and that becomes more natural and (…) exciting.⁹⁵⁹

Adjei’s view above underlines what in PCC is considered “original prayer,” namely that prayer should be articulated in one’s own words (“own means”) and expressed orally. Accordingly, the LP being a prayer “taught by Jesus” should not function, in Pentecostal-Charismatic understanding, as one’s own prayer but as Jesus’s prayer which, based on this line of thought, should not be repeated to God.⁹⁶⁰ From both quotations, i. e. that of Onyinah and Adjei, one gets the impression that the non-liturgical use of the LP is because it appears as a written prayer and, from the perspective of the person making the prayers, it is not original. But these are not the only reasons for its non-liturgical use.

 Founder of God’s Tabernacle of Praise, HQ in Accra, Ghana.  Personal interview with Ebenezer Adjei, Accra, 25 October 2018. Added emphasis.  Of course, Adjei’s view raises tacitly the question of using scripture in prayer which is much beloved in Pentecostal-Charismatic prayer praxis. For example, some members of this Christianity can quote off head full Psalms, say Psalm 23, during prayers. Going with Adjei’s line of thought, would one, in the case of Ps 23, then be repeating David’s prayer (granted David’s authorship of Ps 23) to God?

206

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

Indeed, the more compelling reason from Pentecostal-Charismatic point of view is that the LP is “a format/pattern⁹⁶¹/model of prayer,” just as Mintah understood it above and as noted there, she does not pursue it further. However, here it is elaborated in detail, so that the right question to ask is, what does it mean? Being a pattern or format of prayer, the LP is supposed to, in the words of Onyinah, “(…) enable you to know how to pray.” This view is also shared by Eastwood Anaba,⁹⁶² one of the first-generation of Charismatic leaders. For him, “Jesus’ prayer in Matthew 6 was a model of prayer to show His disciples how to pray (…).”⁹⁶³ It “is a guide,” he continues, “to successful prayer. It gives us (…) guidelines for effective prayer.”⁹⁶⁴ In other words, the LP presents a template or say a structure on which an individual is supposed to fashion out his/her own original, spontaneous, sustained and long prayer which will accordingly produce results, because such prayers, based on the pattern of the LP, will be effective. It is worth noting here that all the sources consulted within PCC for this subsection, namely the personal interviews and popular books written by Pentecostal-Charismatic leaders on this subject, concur that the LP is (and they indeed use these terms) a format or pattern or model of prayer. For instance, Charles Agyinasare who, like Anaba, is also a first-generation Charismatic leader, argues, When Jesus taught the disciples the Lord’s Prayer, He was not teaching them a prayer to be recited by rote, as that would only take them two minutes or less to complete. If He expected that they would pray all night long as He often did, then He could not teach them a prayer that would last only two minutes or less. Instead, Jesus was showing them the pattern of prayer they were to follow.⁹⁶⁵

Agyinasare’s view brings another point to the discussion, i. e. since prayers are supposed to be long and the LP is short in its outline,⁹⁶⁶ it cannot be recited routinely as given. Moreover, for him, Jesus by his prayer ethos expected the disci-

 Interestingly, Nicu Dumitraşu seems to suggest that in Eastern Spirituality, Orthodox theology considers the LP as a “perfect pattern [of prayer] left by Jesus Christ himself to all Christians,” Nicu Dumitraşu, “The Lord’s Prayer in Eastern Spirituality,” Dialogue J. Theol. 52.4 (2013): 350.  Founder of Fountain Gate Chapel International, HQ in Bolgatanga, Ghana.  Eastwood Anaba, Jesus Christ Is Praying for You (Bolgatanga: Desert Leaf Publication, 2015), 50.  Anaba, 59. Added emphases.  Charles Agyinasare, Power in Prayer: Taking Your Blessings by Force, 2nd ed. (Accra: Self Publication, 2013), 32. Added emphases.  Certainly not short in its content.

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

207

ples to also engage in long and sustained prayers. Noteworthy here, therefore, is that the conception of the LP as a pattern/format/model functions as a hermeneutical principle for understanding the LP in PCC. That aside, the question that arises in relation to the pattern/format conception is how it works. According to the sources used here (and certainly they all agree in this), the pattern presents the following structure for every effective and successful prayer. On top of the prayer structure is what the sources have variously called, “worship,” “praise,” “adoration” or “thanksgiving.” By this is meant, a believer approaching God must first adore, praise, worship or thank him before anything else can follow. The invocation together with the first petition (Matt 6:9b – c//Luke 11:2b – c) is used to represent this first step.⁹⁶⁷ The second step is “intercession,” i. e. prayers made in the stead of others. Here, the second and third petitions (Matt 6:10//Luke 11:2c) are understood as patterns for intercessory prayers. According to Agyinasare, who takes time to outline the components of this prayer structure, “Jesus therefore taught that after we have worshiped God, we should pray for the kingdom of God to be established on the face of the earth: i. e. for souls to be saved, for demonised to be set free, for those who are hurting to be healed.”⁹⁶⁸ He comes to this salvific, deliverance and healing understanding of the kingdom petition by making reference to Matt 12:28 and 1 Cor 4:20 which associate kingdom speech with divine power. After worship and intercession follows a third sequential point, namely personal prayers for personal needs. Here, the fourth to sixth petitions (Matt 6:11– 13//Luke 11:3 – 4) are in view. The sequence of the structure ends with thanksgiving and praise which are represented by the doxology. The format or pattern presents thus a sequential orderly step by step structure for effective and successful prayers. Agyinasare sums up the sequence as follows: “Jesus was saying, [therefore that] when you pray use this pattern: first of all worship God; secondly get into intercession; thirdly pray for yourself; and lastly give God all the glory and give Him all the praise for answered prayers.”⁹⁶⁹ Diagram 1 below is an attempt to diagrammatically depict this prayer structure that issues from the format/pattern conception of the text. Taking together, two things seem to account for the non-liturgical use of the LP in PCC (based on the sources considered):

 Interestingly, Martin Luther seems to have had a similar understanding specifically of the first petition in his catechisms. See, Eduard Lohse, Vater unser: Das Gebet der Christen (Darmstadt: Lambert Schneider Verlag, 2012), 106 – 7.  Agyinasare, Power in Prayer, 36..  Agyinasare, 63. Added emphases.

208

1. 2.

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

the LP as a prayer text does not meet Pentecostal-Charismatic understanding of prayer as one that should be long, spontaneous, original and sustained. PCC conceives of the LP as a format/pattern/model of effective and successful prayers so that it is not meant to be recited every Sunday or every other worship day as given but intended to provide a guide to effective and successful Christian prayer praxis.

Diagram 1: The Lord’s Prayer as a prayer structure

The conception of the LP as a pattern of prayer then leads to the second question, namely what other ways there could be for appropriating the LP in PCC. Once the LP is conceived of as a pattern for effective and successful prayers, its

5.4 Paradigmatic examples of reception III: liturgical use

209

use then becomes a support text for instruction on effective and successful praying. Consequently, all the popular books that have been consulted are purely books on the subject of prayer. For instance, some of the books used here have the following titles: “How to Pray” by Dag Heward-Mills; “Jesus Christ is Praying for You” by Eastwood Anaba; “The Power in Prayer: Taking your blessings by force” by Charles Agyinasare, etc. In other words, the text of the LP becomes a proof-text, a base text or say a reference text for exposition on prayer for the churches in this Christianity. By this means, they can maintain the idea of prayer as being long, original, spontaneous and sustained. For example, using the pattern-approach to explain the second petition, Heward-Mills claims: “This step is my favourite step. I can spend three hours here.” “But if you do not have much time,” he admonishes his readers, “you can spend ten minutes on this.”⁹⁷⁰ Its proof-text function further comes into view in Leonard Soku’s book, Biblical Fasting & Prayer,⁹⁷¹ in which the fifth petition (Matt 6:12//Luke 11:4) is quoted to back one of Soku’s “four conditions for forgiveness of sin.” According to him, “Forgiveness is offered to those who forgive others. ”Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us“ (Matt 6:12).”⁹⁷² Having addressed these two concerns, i. e. the non-liturgical use of the LP and its other uses, an example of expositions on the text will be considered by picking the bread petition (Matt 6:11//Luke 11:3). Attention will be given to Agyinasare who has interpreted all the six petitions in his book. According to him, the bread petition is an expression of personal need that “includes every kind of need: your daily bread, your work, your daily provision and every other need that you have.”⁹⁷³ What ones sees here is a material conception of this petition with a broad coverage of one’s entire life and its material needs. Holding this in relation to the academic reception of the text discussed above, one sees semblance to the material interpretation that both Ekem and Addo Jnr. gave to the text. But it is not only Agyinasare who thinks of the bread petition in this material sense. For Heward-Mills argues in relation to this petition that, “Jesus taught us to pray for our daily needs. That means we are to pray about jobs, marriages and

 Dag Heward-Mills, How to Pray (Accra: Parchment House, 2013), 57. Added emphases.  Leonard Soku, Biblical Fasting & Prayer, 3rd ed. (Accra: Warzone Publication, 2016). See also Nicholas Duncan-Williams, Praying Strategic Prayers (Accra: Rhema Publisher, n.d.), 14.  Soku, Biblical Fasting & Prayer, 37. Quotation marks and italics part of the source. An interesting observation here lies in the form of the petition quoted by Soku: it is undoubtedly partly Matthean and partly Lucan. Of course, “trespass(es)” is not to be found in either Gospel except in variants.  Agyinasare, Power in Prayer, 40.

210

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

everything that concerns us.”⁹⁷⁴ It is interesting to see how Heward-Mills expands the bread petition to include economic and social needs such as jobs and marriages. Moreover, even though Pentecostal-Charismatic exposition on the text does not consider exegetical decisions on the text like it has been done here, with this understanding of the bread petition, one can see a leaning towards the interpretation of ἐπιούσιος in the petition as bread necessary for our existence. This observation is clearly expressed by Eric Oti Boateng, “When Jesus was teaching the disciples how to pray, he told them to ask God daily for their needs (bread). Jesus was telling them to ask God daily for everything necessary for life sustenance.”⁹⁷⁵ Considered this way, the petition allows for expansion of its meaning to incorporate every imaginable human need including marriage and job.⁹⁷⁶ Further, it is important to remember that in this stream of Christianity, biblical exposition is done taking keen cognisance of the worldview and socio-economic realities of its members. In line with this way of doing biblical hermeneutics and in line with the given worldview within which this exposition is done, Agyinasare immediately moves from the material understanding of the bread petition to indicate that the devil is a hinderance to acquiring one’s personal needs. In other words, for him, while God will give material things to the believers, it is also the case that the devil always wants to jeopardise those material things or even block the chance of acquiring them. Therefore, under the bread petition, one must also ask God to restrain the devil who might be fighting against the believers’ source of meeting their needs, namely job or work (i. e. the material things). He explains, “The devil does not like you to be in your job and is constantly setting traps for you to lose it.”⁹⁷⁷ As a result, he outlines in relation to his interpretation of this petition different kinds of evil spirits that could potentially deny an individual access to the means of meeting personal needs like jobs. The spirits include “hindering spirits,” “tragedy spirits,” “spirit of error,” “spirit of assassination,” etc.⁹⁷⁸ It is striking at once to see the linking of evil spirits to a discussion on the bread petition. The place one would have expected such reference is the sixth petition. However, this should not come as a surprise, for as al-

 Heward-Mills, How to Pray, 59. Added emphases.  Eric Oti Boateng, The Supernatural Power behind Prayer (Accra: Self Publication, 2017), 37. Added emphases.  Martin Luther had similar and certainly wider ranging understanding of this petition, be it in his Big or Small Catechisms or his personal letter to his friend, Meister Peter Beskendorf in 1535. See, Lohse, 111– 114.  Agyinasare, Power in Prayer, 40.  Agyinasare, 40 – 48.

5.5 Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music

211

ready stated, the biblical exposition should be understood in relation to the underlying worldview. As initially mentioned, the primal worldview allows that religion should meet socio-economic ends and it also allows for belief in evil spirits interfering in efforts at meeting the socio-economic ends. Accordingly, one appreciates why Agyinasare will not only consider the bread petition largely in socio-economic terms but will also immediately draw attention to evil spirits who could be fighting against the meeting of such ends. In summary, the LP finds no⁹⁷⁹ liturgical use in PCC as it does in mainline Christianity and AIC, because 1) it does not meet Pentecostal-Charismatic understanding of prayer and 2) it is conceived of as a pattern or format of prayer for effective and successful prayers. Hence, it is worth noting that the non-liturgical use of the LP in PCC does not imply a simultaneous irrelevance of the text to this Christianity; rather it finds in this context a distinctive reception namely as a basic instructional text for teachings on effective and successful praying. Particularly this understanding leads the discussion to the next reception context of the text in Ghana, namely the devotional context where the text among others, is used to provide instruction on prayer praxis of individual (mostly) and group religious life.

5.5 Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music By devotional books⁹⁸⁰ is meant popular literature that are written with the main objective of helping individual Christians (sometimes groups as well) in their private Christian faith praxis, e. g. in prayer, reading the Bible, practising Christian virtues such as forgiveness, etc. Such books usually adopt a ‘how-to-do’ approach in presenting their content to their readers in a way that the readers can follow step by step in implementing a given spiritual approach to attaining  This negation must be understood (as fully tenable) based on the data that is presented here and similar data that did not find inclusion in this study. Moreover, it must be acknowledged that this stream of Christianity is so fluid that one can hardly make any conclusive statement that will fit every church in it because of its easy adaptability.  Within the Ghanaian Christian context(s), two main categories are used to express private spirituality: “Devotion” and “Quiet Time.” Both terms refer to the religious practice by which an individual Christian or small group of Christians (say a family) spend time in prayer and scripture meditation, mostly early morning before start of a day’s activity or some other time in a day specially planned for this. It is a key emphasis in especially Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity where there is insistence on the individual experiencing God for him or herself through the Holy Spirit. (Admittedly, it is also emphasised in the other streams of Christianity.)

212

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

an effective Christian faith praxis.⁹⁸¹ Based on this definition, a number of popular books that have already been used in the preceding subsection on Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity could also fall under this section. However, it would not bear repeating such material here, because a couple of literature which did not qualify for use under that subsection will find appropriate use here. A differentiating mark of the devotional books from the popular literature under the PCC is that their authors include academics,⁹⁸² clergy with different denominational backgrounds and even non-clergy with non-religious professional backgrounds. For example, one of the devotional books that will be considered here is, The quiet time by Edem Tette,⁹⁸³ a Medical Officer. Another book to be considered is, Lord teach us to pray written by Dorothy B. A. Akoto, a Senior Lecturer in OT, Biblical Hebrew and Gender Studies at the Trinity Theological Seminary, Legon, Accra.⁹⁸⁴ Another category requiring clarification under this subsection is “Christian music.” This category is used loosely here to classify songs that are sung by (non)-Christian commercial artistes⁹⁸⁵ whose content are underlain with biblical passages, themes, characters, etc. In the specific reception material below, the text of the Lord’s Prayer finds a lyrical performance by a famous Ghanaian Gospel artist, Joe Mettle (featuring his South African counterpart, Ntokozo Mbambo). Under these two categories, the reception dynamics of the LP will be explored starting with the former, devotional books. What should be noted in these reception materials, beforehand, is that just like it was underscored in the previous subsection under PCC that the second form of reception of the text there is one of proof-text or reference text or base text for teachings on prayer, so also here, the materials present a dynamic reception of the LP in terms such as either explaining each petition of the text (like Agyinasare above) or using some petitions of the text to support or treat a related subject, say forgiveness in which

 This definition includes other popular literature in Ghana called “Devotional Guides” which are meant to help individual Christians in a systematic manner in building their Christian lives. They mostly provide specific topics or themes with corresponding Bible verses and their interpretations in relation to the themes/topics. This is usually done for each day of a month and mostly for an entire year. This present study, however, excludes this category of devotional books under this subsection of the work solely due to time constraints.  Who present their material, having common readers in mind, in a rather non-academic style.  Edem Tette, The Quiet Time (Accra: Asempa Publishers, 2011).  Dorothy B. E. A. Akoto, Lord Teach Us to Pray (Accra: GAVOSS Education Plc Ltd, 2018).  These are often called “Gospel Artistes” in Ghana and the songs they produce are correspondingly termed as “Gospel music” or “Gospel songs.”

5.5 Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music

213

case the fifth petition is cited or deliverance and temptation with the sixth petition coming into play. First, Akoto’s, Lord Teach us to Pray. In this work, she undertakes a careful praxis-oriented elucidation of each petition of the LP noting in each case their existential application for the Christian in his or her prayer praxis. Surely, the main subject is prayer with the LP being used, however, as the base text for digesting this subject. She has not only individuals, but also groups in mind. According to her, “This Book is designed as a teaching material on prayer for individuals as well as for various groups of people. Women’s Bible Classes/Fellowships, Men’s Fellowships and other Study groups that meet for prayer will find this Book very useful in boosting their prayer life.”⁹⁸⁶ The italicised aspects of the quote indicate not only the target group—individuals and groups (as the definition shows)—but also the aim of the book, namely assisting in the improvement of the prayer praxis of the target audience. Rightly in relation to this aim and subject matter, the LP finds use as an instructional text. Having that in mind, attention will be given to her interpretation of two of the petitions and her general conception of the LP. Starting with the latter, she states clearly in advance in both the foreword and preface to the book that, “A close observation of the Lord’s Prayer shows that it is a general pattern after which various prayers can be modelled.”⁹⁸⁷ In other words, “A careful reading of the Lord’s Prayer shows that it is a general pattern or model for prayer.”⁹⁸⁸ Understood as a pattern or model for prayer, she therefore thinks that breaking it down “into its component parts for readers to understand and use it appropriately when they pray,” is the way to use the LP.⁹⁸⁹ Faced with this manner of reception of the text, one is immediately reminded of the “pattern/model/format” conception of the text within Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity in Ghana. The same approach is adopted by Akoto here. For understanding it as a general pattern/model for prayer, she subsequently uses it to instruct on prayer. The question that one could pose here is whether Akoto also presents in her book a prayer pattern like, for instance, Agyinasare does. In response, one should note that she indicates that the text is a general pattern or model for prayer and not of prayer. Nonetheless, in reading the book, one gets the idea that the former entails the latter. Accordingly, she observes a two-part structure of the text based on which she outlines her prayer pattern.⁹⁹⁰ The first part, according     

Akoto, Akoto, Akoto, Akoto, Akoto,

Lord Teach Us to Pray, ix. Emphases added. ix. xi. ix. 3.

214

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

to her, “shows a perfect way of beginning our prayers, [it] teaches us to turn first and foremost toward God in worship and adoration.” “As such,” she continues, “prior to asking for things for ourselves, it is very important that we pray about the things that God desires.”⁹⁹¹ If this first part is “about the things that God desires” which should be understood as encapsulating the invocation and the first three petitions, then the second part is about “ourselves and our needs,” which encompasses the rest of the petitions including the doxology (which she tags as “praise to God”).⁹⁹² For her, this pattern is constitutive of “every good prayer.”⁹⁹³ Given that Akoto’s structure is almost like Agyinasare’s under the PCC, it bears to hold both side by side. Juxtaposing the two, it is evident that even though they differ in the components of the structure, they both think that the LP presents the right approach to prayer. For instance, whereas Akoto suggests that the perfect way to pray is to first address God in worship and adoration (step 1) before presenting one’s needs with a closing praise to God (step 2), Agyinasare’s prayer structure is a four-part structure beginning also with worship and adoration which has the invocation and first petition in mind, but continuing with intercession before personal needs and ending with thanksgiving for answered prayers. In summary, therefore, both present two different but similar prayer patterns based on the LP with the same aim, namely providing the right approach to God in prayer. With her conception of the LP as a prayer pattern and depicting the structure, she can now explain each petition with the aim of helping her readers to know what it means and subsequently to apply it. That then brings it to the former, namely presenting her interpretation of some of the petitions. Two will be presented, the invocation (Matt 6:9b//Luke 11:2b) and the bread petition (Matt 6:10//Luke 11:3). Before then, it helps to state that she summarises the second part as follows; the fourth petition as food, the fifth as forgiveness, the sixth together as protection and the doxology as praise to God.⁹⁹⁴ Beginning with the invocation, one is immediately struck by the fact that Akoto inserts into the invocation (in square brackets) ‘Parent’; “Our Father [Parent].”⁹⁹⁵ Why is that necessary? The right guess could be that given her gender studies background, she would immediately want to prevent any misunderstanding of the Father epithet

    

Akoto, 3. Akoto, 4. Akoto, 28. Akoto, 4. Akoto, 7.

5.5 Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music

215

in masculine terms. “Parent” is more neutral, it appears.⁹⁹⁶ Re-presented it this way, she sees in the invocation God as a good parent who will listen to his children, provide for them and train them well for life’s countless challenges.⁹⁹⁷ For Akoto too, the plural pronoun, “our” in the invocation is of relevance. She intimates that it calls for Christians to quit their selfish prayers and pray for others too since “our” suggests that there are other children of God elsewhere.⁹⁹⁸ When she comes to the bread petition, she understands it as both physical food that sustains life and provide strength for living and spiritual food that nourishes the soul.⁹⁹⁹ As physical food for the body, the bread being asked for represents a number of things for Akoto: 1) as working to produce the needed food especially for the agricultural sector so that the petition is seeking God’s support for a good yield. She explains, “When we pray that God should ‘give us our daily bread,’ we acknowledge that God is the Almighty and without God’s help our farm work will be in vain.”¹⁰⁰⁰ 2) The bread is also a job for those whose means of getting food is through their salaries. Accordingly, she argues that, “If people have no paid jobs or if they have jobs that earn meagre income, the people cannot buy enough food for their survival.”¹⁰⁰¹ As stated, the bread here also means “spiritual food for our souls” for Akoto.¹⁰⁰² As spiritual food, it “does not come from our farm produce (…) but from God.”¹⁰⁰³ The concrete divine source of this food is through prayers, Bible study, the Lord’s Supper.¹⁰⁰⁴ Having understood the petition in this manner, she re-expresses it for the reader as follows; “Give us this day what we need for living. Give us food and clothing for our physical bodies. Feed our souls also that they may grow.”¹⁰⁰⁵ What can be seen in this quote is that her understanding of the bread as physical food is not just limited to food as a nutritional category, but in material terms, just like Ekem and Addo Jnr. above, as including basic necessities of life. In this regard, one realises a leaning towards two of the five interpretations of τόν ἐπιούσιον as bread necessary for existence and as spiritual bread.  See the earlier note on Musa Dube’s protest against the presentation of God as Father in this text.  Akoto, Lord Teach Us to Pray, 8.  Akoto, 8 – 9.  Akoto, 28 – 33.  Akoto, 29.  Akoto, 30.  Akoto, 31.  Akoto, 31.  Akoto, 31– 32.  Akoto, 33.

216

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

If Akoto uses the LP as a base text for instruction on prayer and as a result explains each petition, what follows hereafter are not reception materials that exhaust the text in that manner, but ones which, in dealing with topics that bear thematic relations to the petitions of the LP, make reference to the text. Accordingly, the kind of reception one encounters is the text as a reference text or a proof-text. In this light stand the works of Tette, The quiet time and Christian Ocloo, Forgive as you have been forgiven which will be considered one after the other below. Starting with Tette, the subject matter of her book is “quiet time” understood as “a special time we set aside each day to be alone with God and to relate with him.”¹⁰⁰⁶ In other words, it refers to an individual Christian religious practice of private devotion to God meant to build one’s relationship with him. As such, it comprises, according to Tette, three elements: 1) a time of praise and worship, 2) a time of Bible study and meditation, and 3) a time of prayer and intercession.¹⁰⁰⁷ These three components should be understood as standing in a successive relationship to each other, thus one begins with point 1) and ends with point 3). Being the last part of the private devotion, the prayer and intercession constitute the point where “we bring our petitions before the Lord in prayer.”¹⁰⁰⁸ It is within this third section of the quiet time that the LP finds use in Tette’s hands. She employs the LP as a proof-text to argue that even though in Matt 6:8 Jesus reveals that the Father has foreknowledge of the needs of the disciples, he still teaches them to pray by giving them the LP.¹⁰⁰⁹ Her point is that prayer is a compulsory Christian discipline.¹⁰¹⁰ She brings this point home by highlighting the verbal imperatives in the LP; “Give us,” “Lead us” and “Deliver us.”¹⁰¹¹ If Tette uses the text here as a proof-text to argue her point out, she finds it also as a reference text for another use, namely showing that forgiving others is necessary for answered prayers.¹⁰¹² She contends, “In the Lord’s prayer, we are taught to say, ‘forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.’ How can we ask for God’s mercy and provision when we are not prepared to show similar concern and love to others?”¹⁰¹³ The reference to the fifth petition

       

Tette, The Quiet Time, 1. Tette, 6. Tette, 19. Tette, 20. Tette, 20. Tette, 20. Tette, 28. Tette, 28.

5.5 Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music

217

(i. e. Matt 6:12, Luke 11:4)¹⁰¹⁴ is one of Tette’s seven conditions for answered prayer.¹⁰¹⁵ In sum, Tette sees the LP, on the one hand, as providing proof of the necessity of prayer and, on the other hand, as offering one of the essential conditions for answered prayers. She gives backing to her point by emphasising that the Lord Jesus gives the text. Ocloo’s Forgive as you have been forgiven is next to be considered. Taking the title of his book from Col 3:13, he treats the subject of forgiveness from two dimensions: 1) forgiveness as it takes place between God and human beings¹⁰¹⁶ and 2) following from that forgiveness between human beings.¹⁰¹⁷ Approaching the subject in this manner, he views forgiveness as not only granted by God to humans, but also, on the side of humans, as expected to be expressed in interpersonal relations. It is within this context that the LP finds use in Ocloo’s book. In the first aspect of his discussion (forgiveness between God and humans), he outlines for the reader ways of obtaining forgiveness from God. In this wise, he quotes the Matthean text to express the point that forgiveness from God is contingent on an individual recipient’s prior forgiveness of others. According to him, “In Matthew 6:12, the Lord Jesus taught us to ask the Father to ‘Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.’ In other words, the basis for asking the Lord to forgive us is that we also have forgiven those who offend us.”¹⁰¹⁸ Here, just as in Tette’s book, the use of the LP is one of support or reference text. For he uses it to back one of the conditions he considers as indispensable for obtaining divine forgiveness. The support function of the text here equally receives a special authoritative character because of its attribution to “the Lord Jesus.” In mentioning “the Lord Jesus” in relation to the text, Ocloo’s argument receives a dominical accentuation. Aside this use in the first part of his approach to the subject matter of his book, he also references the LP in the second part, i. e. reciprocal forgiveness among believers. Here, he uses the forgiveness petition (quoting the Lucan text, Luke 11:4 and Matt 6:12) to support his argument that reciprocal forgiveness among Christians is required and is expected of every Christian by Jesus through his teaching of the Lord’s Prayer.¹⁰¹⁹ In all, the use of the text here is just like what has already been seen elsewhere; a ref-

 Which is more Lucan than Matthean.  See Tette, The Quiet Time, 26 – 30.  See Christian B. Ocloo, Forgive as You Have Been Forgiven, Living the Practical Christian Life (Accra: Asempa Publishers, 2014), 17– 31.  Ocloo, 34– 38.  Ocloo, 30.  Ocloo, 34.

218

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

erence, support or proof text for discussing subjects that have relations to the LP; here forgiveness. Taking together, the reception of the text within the devotional context is varied but it presents a similar manner of use. On the one side, there is the case of Akoto, whose conception of the text as presenting a prayer pattern, allows her to use it to provide an exposition on prayer and through that give her readers a pattern to any good prayer. On the other side stand Tette and Ocloo who draw on parts of the text to support their own arguments on subject related topics like quiet time and forgiveness. In both cases (i. e. Akoto and these two), the text is consciously related to Jesus in order to give its use an authoritative, dominical character. In other words, they emphasise that the prayer is the prayer taught by the Lord and therefore should be taken seriously. That considered, attention will now be turned to the second category, songs. As initially mentioned, Joe Mettle musically¹⁰²⁰ performs the text featuring Ntokozo Mbambo. The text is given a new name, “Amen.” Amen is one of the songs on Mettle’s album, “God of Miracles.” The text does not only see this initial reception-induced change in name, but also for it to be well articulated musically, parts of the texts are, through refrains, repeated severally. Both the name, “Amen” and the refrains in the song text could give a clue as to the interpretation given to the text in this unique reception context. To explore this further, however, it appears helpful to firstly present the text below before searching for new meaning(s) in this usage. Amen¹⁰²¹ Our Father in Heaven, Hallowed be thy Name Thy kingdom come; thy will be done On earth as it is in Heaven Amen amen amen (ₓ6) Give us this day our daily bread And forgive our debts, as we forgive Those who sin against us

 Martin Luther already lyricised the text as part of the many songs he wrote which are in use today in the evangelical-lutheran churches and beyond; it is found in the Evangelische Gesangbuch as No. 344, Vater unser im Himmelreich.  The lyrics here with the Zulu translations is an adaption from Gavin and Louise, ‘Zulu Worship Chord Charts: Amen – Joe Mettle and Ntokozo Mbambo’, Zulu Worship Chord Charts (blog), 10 May 2018, http://zuluworship.blogspot.com/2018/05/amen-joe-mettle-and-ntokozombambo.html.

5.5 Paradigmatic examples of reception IV: Devotional books and Christian music

219

Let Your kingdom come (Amen Amen) And Your will be done (Amen Amen) (ₓ2) Amen amen amen (ₓ6) Yehla Nkosi singageni [Come down Lord, Do not lead us] Ekulingweni usikhulule [Into temptation, and deliver us] Kokuphi Amen! [From evil, Amen!] Give us this day our daily bread And forgive our sins, as we forgive Those who sin against us, Amen Let Your kingdom come (Amen Amen) And Your will be done (Amen Amen) (ₓ2) Amen amen amen (ₓ6) Bayete kuwe [Hail Your name] Sithi Uphakeme, uphakeme, uphakeme [We say be lifted up, lifted high, lifted high] Bayete! Bayete! Bayete! [Hail! Hail! Hail!] Let Your kingdom come (Amen Amen) And Your will be done (Amen Amen) (ₓ2)

The song text presented displays a couple of features worth commenting. First, one sees from the last two lines of the second stanza a conflation of Matt 6:12 and Luke 11:4a: the first part with “debts” being Matthean and the second part with “sins” being Lucan. Second, the structure of the song text depicts a four-fold sequence, namely four stanzas interspersed with refrains. The first stanza comprises the first three “you petitions,” the second stanza, the bread and forgiveness petitions; the third stanza which is in Zulu (performed by Mbambo) includes the temptation and deliverance petitions with an addition of “Come down Lord.” The fourth¹⁰²² stanza presents an own doxology unlike the usual threefold doxology presented in the exegesis above. This four-fold stanza text with the interspersed refrains or choruses offers not only smooth sequential musical movement from top to bottom providing a well-rounded piece of music, but more importantly, it also allows a prediction of the points of emphasis and with that the interpretation given to the text in this manner of reception. Obviously, the most repeated chorus is “Amen” which is incidentally also the title of the song. If one were to ask why this repetition of “Amen,” a possible answer could be that not only is “Amen” being emphasised through the refrain, but also the emphasis actually serves the end that the prayer nature of the text is acknowledged in the song and more importantly what is being asked for in the  One could talk of five stanzas if the repeated second stanza is considered as an independent stanza.

220

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

prayer text (or song) should be granted or done without delay. The sense of the urgency is perceived through the addition of “Come down Lord” to the third stanza. It is as if to say (like some of the Psalms), “Come down now and act now if not we will be tempted and overcome by evil and perish as a result.” But it is not only “Amen” that is used as a chorus. Interestingly, the kingdom and will petitions are also chorused: “Let Your kingdom come (Amen Amen)/ And Your will be done (Amen Amen) (ₓ2).” By this, one gets the impression that Mettle (with Mbambo) without doubt in his mind clearly sets these two petitions as of great importance that must be ‘amened’ without delay. Indeed, the other petitions must be equally important to him, but it seems that through the chorusing of these two petitions, he puts them ahead of the others. Certainly, he repeats the bread and forgiveness petitions a second time, an indication of his emphasis on them too, but not of an equal degree of emphasis as these other two petitions. Consequently, one is drawn to see here through this manner of reception, 1) a shift of emphasis from the bread petition as seen in Ekem and Addo Jnr. (under the academic reception) to the kingdom and the will of God and 2) through that (and for the first time in this study) a grading of the petitions such that the kingdom and will petitions appear most important. The ranking of the petitions will receive a new accentuation in the next subsection to which attention is turned now.

5.6 Paradigmatic examples of reception V: Ecumenical documents Aside the foregoing areas of reception of the LP in the Christian context in Ghana, another area provides a further manner of reception which is not quite different from what has been presented so far, yet the nature of the reception material, i. e. ecumenical documents, requires that it is treated separately under this subsection. By ecumenical documents is meant documents produced by ecumenical bodies such as the Christian Council of Ghana (CCG) and similar other bodies in Ghana. Such documents are not meant for only one denomination but a lot of confessional traditions. One of such documents, What Church members should know, provides data for the discussion in this subsection. Published by the CCG, it is recommended “to all churches” with the aim of providing basic Bible knowledge to all Christians.¹⁰²³ Such an aim is grounded by

 Christian Council of Ghana, What Church Members Should Know (Accra: Asempa Publishers, 2017), viii.

5.6 Paradigmatic examples of reception V: Ecumenical documents

221

the CCG’s conviction (at the time of publication) that “(…) it is still possible to find (…) church members who cannot give a proper account of what they believe as Christians.”¹⁰²⁴ Accordingly, this ecumenical material is designed as a course material (with six months to one year duration) to provide concise information on rather complex topics such as the beginning of the cosmos, the Bible itself, Christology, the Holy Spirit; ecclesiastical and sacramental issues like baptism, confirmation, Lord’s Supper, church, marriage, etc. Other practical topics to be found in the book are faith and work, sex, prayer, etc. In treating these complex topics in a condensed manner, the Lord’s Prayer is introduced (not surprisingly) under the lesson on prayer. With a catechetical, question-and-answer approach, the lesson first defines what prayer is and anticipatingly refers to the LP as a didactic source from which one can learn much about prayer.¹⁰²⁵ It further specifies the object of Christian prayer by deliberately quoting the invocation of the LP: “To whom do we pray?,” goes the question and the answer; “We pray to ‘our Father’.”¹⁰²⁶ Similarly, in order to indicate the most important things one should ask for in prayer, the first section of the LP is referenced with only the third of the first three petitions being explicitly cited: “What is the most important thing to ask for? The Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9 – 13) starts with the petitions about God. Prayer is not telling God what you want (he knows that already, Matthew 6:32), but asking God what he wants. Pray ‘Thy will be done,’ not ‘My will be done’ (…).”¹⁰²⁷ Attention should be given to the question, “What is the most important thing to ask for?,” for that explains why only the third petition is cited: it is about the most important thing in prayer not things. In this light, even though the first three petitions are considered together (as being about God) to be important, the most important among them is, however, the third, the will of God. Here, one sees again a grading of the petitions in two ways: on the one hand, the You-Petitions about God is considered more important than the last three. On the other hand, even among the first three, the third is the most important of all (and indeed the most important of all the petitions by extension).¹⁰²⁸ The

 Christian Council of Ghana, viii.  Christian Council of Ghana, 59.  Christian Council of Ghana, 59.  Christian Council of Ghana, 59. Added emphasis.  The lesson goes further to state other things that one could ask for in prayer and, even though, there, it does not directly reference the text of LP (instead OT and other NT references) it mentions first confession of sins (which corresponds to the fifth petition), needs, problems, temptations, etc. It, moreover, provides answers to questions on time, place of prayer and how prayers are answered.

222

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

manner of use of the text in this ecumenical document allows for the following observations. One realises a didactic reception of the text as being the base text of the subject of prayer just like it has been seen before now. In addition, just like Joe Mettle ranked the petitions in his song, here also a grading of the petitions in terms of importance is observable.

5.7 Paradigmatic examples of reception VI: School textbooks Even though the present study limits itself largely to the Christian setting, here, it goes beyond this limit to indicate the extent of impact of the text outside the Christian context. Accordingly, a reception document from the educational context in Ghana (precisely from the basic education level) will be presented.¹⁰²⁹ In Primary Schools in Ghana, pupils take, among others, subjects like Religious and Moral Education (RME). RME encompasses (depending on the Class in which it is being taught) topics such as “God and creation,” “religious practices and their moral implications,” “religious leaders,” “family and community and authority,” etc.¹⁰³⁰ RME aims inter alia to give basic ‘theological’ knowledge about God and creation, teach socio-cultural values and moral discipline, interreligious competence, etc. and all that from a multifaith approach since the country is a multireligious one.¹⁰³¹ Corresponding textbooks are thus produced by different publishing houses to capture the content of this subject and meet its didactic aims. Under this subsection, two of the textbooks will be presented side by side to analyse the reception of the study text in them. The first textbook is the Simplified Religious & Moral Education for Primary 5 ¹⁰³² and the second is the Religious

 The education system in Ghana has three main components: 1) Primary School (Class 1 to 6), 2) Junior High School (JHS) and 3) Senior High School (SHS). 1) and 2) constitute Basic Education. Students in 3) graduate by taking the West African Secondary School Certificate Examination (WASSCE, also taken in the other English-speaking West African countries) after which they can apply to universities (which run four-year undergraduate programmes) or to other tertiary institutions.  See NaCCA, ‘Religious and Moral Education: Curriculum for Primary Schools (Basic 1– 6)’ (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, Ministry of Education Ghana, September 2019).  See, NaCCA, vii.  Nyamekeh Norsiah, Simplified Religious & Moral Education: For Primary 5 (Accra: Vestel Publications, 2016). It should be noted that the textbook here is only one of similar textbooks on the subject. But interestingly, at the time of writing, a cross reference in some of the other textbooks on RME showed similar use of the text.

5.7 Paradigmatic examples of reception VI: School textbooks

223

and Moral Education for Basic Six (6) Pupils. ¹⁰³³ The former was published before the introduction of the new curriculum on RME in 2019 by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NaCCA)¹⁰³⁴ under Ghana’s Ministry of Education while the latter was published based on the new curriculum. This combination, therefore, allows for an assessment regarding any change (if any) in the use of the LP in these textbooks based on curriculum change. In addition, while the former textbook is for Primary 5, the latter is for Primary 6. With this mix too, the possibility of seeing the use of the text in different School Classes is present. Furthermore, while the Primary 5 textbook is divided into Sections and Units, the Primary 6 is in Chapters. Section Four (4)—titled, Act of Worship—of the Primary 5 textbook and Chapter Three (3)—titled, Worship and Prayer—of the Primary 6 textbook will be focus areas for the analysis here, for in these parts of the textbooks, the religious phenomenon of worship in the three main religions (Christianity, Islam and ATRs) in Ghana are treated. Firstly, acts of worship in Christianity are presented which will be elaborated further shortly, since that constitutes an area of interest for this study. Secondly, acts of Islamic worship are also presented. Here, the author of the Primary 5 textbook presents, with corresponding brief explanations, the Five Pillars of Islam as constitutive of “The Islamic requirement of worship (…).”¹⁰³⁵ Nyamekye Norsiah (author of the Primary 5 book), however, elaborates more on the second Pillar of Islam, Salat, by indicating the five time periods in the day that Salat is observed. He also underscores that Salat creates a direct connection between Islamic worshippers and Allah.¹⁰³⁶ By his extended focus on Salat, he inadvertently perceives it as the most important act of worship in Islam which the Primary 5 pupil should know. In a similar but somewhat different manner, the author of the Primary 6 book presents on Islamic worship but focuses solely on Salat without stating the Five Pillars of Islam.¹⁰³⁷ In this manner, Dent-Augustine Theophilus (author of the Primary 6 book) dedicates detailed attention to Islamic prayer (Salat) noting, just like Norsiah, the five times daily Islamic prayer routine. But unlike Norsiah, Theophilus presents an important aspect of Salat, namely a Qur’anic quotation remotely analogous to the LP: the Fatiha (Qu’ran 1:1– 7).¹⁰³⁸ Lastly, African Traditional Religions (ATRs) are considered. Norsiah, terming this as

 Dent-Augustine Theophilus, Religious and Moral Education for Basic Six (6) Pupils, Victory Series (Kumasi: NABAF Victory Publishers, 2019).  NaCCA, ‘Religious and Moral Education: Curriculum for Primary Schools (Basic 1– 6)’.  Norsiah, Simplified Religious & Moral Education: For Primary 5, 105.  Norsiah, 105 – 6.  Theophilus, Religious and Moral Education for Basic Six (6) Pupils, 39 – 46.  See, Theophilus, 43.

224

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

“Traditional Religion,”¹⁰³⁹ indicates up front regarding this topic that traditionalists, just like Christians and Muslims, believe in one God, the Supreme Being, who created the heavens and earth. But unlike the two religions, the traditionalists worship the Supreme Being through smaller gods and ancestors.¹⁰⁴⁰ According to him, “Some of the ways they worship is through prayers made to their gods by pouring libation, rituals, sacrifices, celebration of festivals, invocations, dancing, and drumming.”¹⁰⁴¹ Theophilus, on his part, presents the same observation except that he dilates a bit more on the phenomenon of libation; a visible medium of prayer in most ATRs.¹⁰⁴² Presented this way, Norsiah (for Primary 5) and Theophilus (for Primary 6) succeed in giving their audience an idea of the acts of worship in the three main religions in Ghana. It would have, however, been more enriching to have added an excerpt of traditional prayers made during the act of pouring libation under the section on ATRs especially for the Primary 6 textbook. However, since presently the interest lies in the aspect on Christianity, attention should be focused on it. Hence, attention will be given to a sub-heading in Unit 1 of Section 4 of the Primary 5 textbook where Norsiah explains Christian worship as entailing important parts such as, praises, adoration, fasting and prayers.¹⁰⁴³ Prayer is considered there as a “communication with God.”¹⁰⁴⁴ Such a communication is to be undergirded by biblical references: “In prayer, Christians are admonished to use verses in the Bible to emphasize their points in prayer.”¹⁰⁴⁵ “Points in prayer” in the quotation should be understood as petitions or concerns raised in prayer. Following this conviction, Matthew 6:9 – 13 (with an added doxology) is introduced with the title: “Jesus teaches us to pray.” Norsiah adds the following comment to the text: “Jesus taught prayer and encouraged believers to pray.”¹⁰⁴⁶ Likewise in the Primary 6 textbook, a similar definition of prayer is espoused with further attention to different types of Christian prayers. One of the types of Christian prayers, for Theophilus, is “Prayer of thanksgiving.”¹⁰⁴⁷ Under prayer of thanksgiving, he indicates, “Jesus Christ

 count        

To be precise, it should be “Religions” and not “Religion” as the singular does not acfully for the different traditional ethnic religions in the country. Norsiah, Simplified Religious & Moral Education: For Primary 5, 109. Norsiah, 109. Theophilus, Religious and Moral Education for Basic Six (6) Pupils, 48. Norsiah, Simplified Religious & Moral Education: For Primary 5, 100. Norsiah, 100. Norsiah, 100. Norsiah, 100 – 101. Theophilus, Religious and Moral Education for Basic Six (6) Pupils, 35 – 37.

5.7 Paradigmatic examples of reception VI: School textbooks

225

taught Christians how to pray in ‘the Lord’s Prayer’ which is also called ‘the model prayer’.”¹⁰⁴⁸ It is unclear the immediate link between “Prayer of thanksgiving” and the Lord’s Prayer in the context of Theophilus’ textbook. Nonetheless, in conceiving the LP as “the model prayer,” he could be suggesting, just like it was seen earlier under the prayer structure of Agyinasare and Akoto, that the LP as a model of prayer includes/teaches different types of prayer one of which is the prayer of thanksgiving. After conceiving the text this way, he goes further to introduce his text of the LP quoting Matt 6:9 – 13 (with an added doxology) by prefacing it as follows: “Jesus Christ taught the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6:9 – 13 when His disciples wanted Him to teach them how to pray.”¹⁰⁴⁹ One should note here before the following analysis that this preface disregards the separate literary contexts of the LP in both Matthew and Luke when it claims that the instance of teaching the LP in Matt 6:9 – 13 was the request of the disciples to Jesus to teach them how to pray. Surely, this is the Lucan context and not Matthean.¹⁰⁵⁰ That notwithstanding, a closer look at the above presentations of the LP in both textbooks allows for the following comments. 1. The comments that each textbook employ to introduce the text of the LP set the accent on the didactic or instructional character of the text from the point of view of Jesus. For instance, both textbooks note that Jesus is not only the originator of the text, but through it, he also teaches Christians how to pray. 2. Related to point 1., the double repetition of “Jesus” in those prefacing comments should be taken as drawing attention to the authority behind the text, namely the Lord himself and as such the text has a dominical character. 3. Also linked to points 1. and 2. is that through the conception of the LP as a didactic text on prayer, both textbooks (and this is explicit in that of Primary 6) see the LP as a model for Christian prayer, a conception that has been seen in some of the other reception areas above. 4. Lastly, in quoting the text of LP in a context of discussing religious worship in Ghana, the textbooks imply that the LP is a representative text of the Christian religion which they discuss next to Islam and ATRs. In sum, the reception of the text in these textbooks (and indeed outside the Christian context) suggests that the LP is not only a central Christian text on  Theophilus, 35. Emphases part of the quotation.  Theophilus, 37.  Herein lies the value of preceding an exegetical part to a study on reception history of a biblical text, especially of one widely used like the Lord’s Prayer.

226

5 Contemporary reception of the Lord’s Prayer in Ghana

prayer, but importantly also a record of Jesus’s prayer through which he taught (teaches) believers how to pray. It, therefore, mirrors much of the understandings of the text in previous discussions before now. What is, however, new and remarkable is that it finds use in such a context, for which reason it was thought worthy of consideration here.

5.8 Conclusion With the aid of the various reception materials both written and oral, one observes a multi-layered reception dynamic of the text of the LP in the various reception areas considered above. Be it in the area of mother-tongue translations or the academic contexts or the liturgical and devotional or even in songs and school contexts, the reception of the text takes different forms, yet with similarities that cut across. For instance, the instructional character of the text runs through the various reception areas. With the instructional character goes its basic text on prayer function. Not only that, but also prayer as the primary context within which the reception of the text takes place is hard to escape. This is not surprising as the text stems from the same context in the Gospel tradition. Despite such similarities, one also observes instances in which the reception dynamic results in rephrasing or re-interpretation of some petitions of the text. Take for example the bread petition being seen in some cases as “economic resources,” as job, marriage, etc. Through these re-phrasings one gains useful insights into which parts of the text receive more emphases than others. It does not come out only in the cases of re-interpretations, but also in cases where the petitions are deliberately graded or ranked. For this reason, in the following main conclusion below, an attempt will be made not only to round up the study by holding the various parts of the study together, but also to present a Ghanaian reading of the text from a reception historical perspective.

6 Conclusion: Reading the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:9b – 13) from a Ghanaian perspective Titling the conclusion of the study as Reading the Lord’s Prayer from a Ghanaian perspective is deliberately done to draw attention, not only to the fact that the six paradigmatic reception areas of the text have given a valuable insight into the life of this crucial NT text in a specific geographical and cultural context, Ghana, but also to the possibility of the reception results providing a unique synthesised reading of the text from that context. Accordingly, in concluding the study the following general but relevant observations of the text’s reception in Ghana deserve mention, yet without rehashing the content of all the six paradigmatic reception areas—1) mother-tongue translations of the text, 2) academic discussions on the text, 3) liturgical use of the text, 4) use in devotional materials and in Christian music, 5) in ecumenical documents and 6) in school textbooks. 1. The LP is considered as a pattern or model¹⁰⁵¹ of prayer, presenting a prayer structure with which one can make a good or effective prayer that will be answered. The idea of the LP presenting a prayer structure with identifiable components is first seen in the Pentecostal-Charismatic context¹⁰⁵² where, for example, Charles Agyinasare, a charismatic Bishop, interprets the text along this line and produces a prayer structure out of it. According to him, the prayer structure of the text begins with praise, worship, and thanksgiving (i. e. the invocation and first petition, Matt 6:9b – c//Luke 11:2b – c), continues with intercession (second and third petitions, Matt 6:10//Luke 11:2c) and personal prayers made for one’s needs (i. e. fourth to sixth petitions, Matt 6:11– 13//Luke 11:3 – 4) and ends with thanksgiving and praise (i. e. the doxology). A similar structure is outlined in the devotional reception context by Dorothy Akoto with which she instructs her audience on effective praying.¹⁰⁵³ This consideration is important because it informs the use of the text, not only generally as a base text for instruction on the Christian discipline of prayer, but specifically also as a decisive reason for its non-liturgical use in Pentecostal-Charismatic Christian worship in Ghana. A reception of the text in this manner is not only fascinating but, in terms of theory, it is also very revealing, for it offers a quintessential instance in which the two-dimensional nature of textual reception is depicted; namely the impact of the  As already mentioned, the Matthean context of the LP, namely the Sermon on the Mount, allows for a consideration that Matthew introduces his LP as a model of right prayer/praying.  See Subsection 5.4.3 above.  See Subsection 5.5 above. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-008

228

2.

3.

4.

6 Conclusion

readers on the text and the text on the reader. Here, the production of the prayer structure is simultaneously the work of the readers on the text and the influence of the text on the readers because the produced prayer structure informs their prayer praxis. Following from point 1., the LP finds use largely in prayer and prayer related contexts. This is evident in the fact that most of the reception materials considered are materials directly (and indirectly) about prayer. Within these contexts, in order to insist on the need to consider the use(s) of the text, the related reception materials consciously emphasise that the text is a prayer given by the Lord Jesus Christ and through this they offer dominical backing to their arguments. Moreover, not only is it a pattern of prayer, but it is also in some cases considered as a proof or reference text for discussing biblical themes that have thematic relations to petitions of the text. For instance, Edem Tette, in her The quiet time, uses the text in this manner when she intimates that the text provides proof of the necessity of prayer and offers one of the essential conditions for answered prayers, namely forgiveness—for the LP contains a petition on forgiveness which for her is necessary for an answered prayer. She gives backing to her point by emphasising that the Lord Jesus gave the text. In a comparable manner of use, Christian Ocloo, in discussing the subject matter of forgiveness, finds the corresponding forgiveness petition in the text to be a significant reference to make in advancing his point on the human and divine aspects of offering forgiveness. The reference to the “Lord Jesus” as the provenance of the text should not be overlooked, for it lends a dominical support to the argument being made by the reception documents. An advanced version of the proof-reference-text conception is a consideration of the LP as an advocacy text with divine backing. This appears particularly in the academic reception area¹⁰⁵⁴ of the text where Ekem and Addo Jnr. are met working on the bread petition respectively from mother-tongue and liberation biblical hermeneutical perspectives. Ekem, considering this part of the text in material terms, sees an implicit divine basis to argue that government policies in Ghana must be drafted and implemented in ways that efficiently appropriate available national resources for the betterment of the living standards of Ghanaians. Addo Jnr., on his part, contends that people in positions of trust, especially those with the charge of managing national resources, are required by the bread petition to allocate the re-

 See Subsection 5.3 above.

6 Conclusion

5.

6.

229

sources to the benefit of the poor and hungry. For the petition to suit such a call, it must, according to him, be re-read as, “Give us today our daily economic resources.” Worthy of note in relation to these two authors is that their reception of the text is decisively influenced by their chosen hermeneutical approaches, for which reason reception studies also include a consideration of hermeneutical principles that influence interpretation. The LP assumes a representative text status for the (entire) Christian religion in a context outside the Christian domain, namely in school textbooks for basic education in Ghana. The authors of the consulted textbooks on Religious & Moral Education (RME) insert the text of LP as part of their discussion on Christianity and its worship next to Islam and ATRs (the other two religions in Ghana). In their commentary on the text, they indicate that Jesus taught Christians to pray the LP. The representative status is seen in the fact that the text is introduced as unique to Christianity (in relation to the other two religions) without referring to denominational/confessional differences. Finally, parts of the text particularly the bread petition found re-readings and interesting interpretations in some of the reception documents. For instance, Ekem rephrases it as, “Today too, give us that which will be sufficient for us.” Additionally, Addo Jnr. renders it as, “Give us this day our daily economic resources.” Similarly, Akoto considers it as, “Give us this day what we need for living. Give us food and clothing for our physical bodies. Feed our souls also that they may grow.” Interesting interpretations include bread as referring to “marriage” and “jobs” according to Heward-Mills and bread as connoting “daily bread,” “provision” and “work” according to Agyinasare. These re-readings and interpretations reflect different re-contextualisation and re-purposing of the text in the reception context.

In addition to the foregoing observations, if the six reception areas together are taking together, one observes that the text finds different but somewhat similar interpretations and uses depending on the reception area. Moreover, its impact is realised through the recontextualization and repurposing (and in some cases, explicit re-reading) of it in the respective reception areas. Certainly, the main aim of the study was to explore the many ways that the Lord’s Prayer could have been received in Ghana. The advantage of such a broad aim is that it allowed the study to consider as many reception areas of the text as possible.¹⁰⁵⁵ The disadvantage, nonetheless, is that the different reception areas

 Further, it is so far the only such study on the text in Ghana. At the time of the study, I did

230

6 Conclusion

could not be explored in much detail as the case would have been if one, for instance, limited the study to only academic reception or liturgical reception in the three main streams of Christianity in Ghana or concentrating on just one petition of the text, etc.¹⁰⁵⁶ That aside, the understanding of biblical reception history as one that studies the uses and effects of a text on people resulting from how they have read and interpreted the text informed the organisation of this study. As noted earlier, undertaking a contemporary reception of a biblical text like the present study has done, requires that one first accounts for the text in its historical biblical context through historical-critical exegesis. For the text of the LP, it was explained that preceding the textual reception with an exegesis was necessary given the canonical remembrance of its origin. In this regard, Clark’s description of the text as an emigrant was found suitable. Accordingly, the study proceeded with an initial exegesis of the Lord’s Prayer in Part I (i. e. chapter 2) using Matt 6:9b – 13 as a base text. The choice of Matthew’s text was solely influenced by the reception context because it is this text that finds (most) use and is widely known in the reception context. But as it is evident in the study, in some reception areas, there is either a sole reference to the Lucan text as in the case of Joyce Afia Adubea Mintah’s study, or a conflation of both texts. As underscored in Part I, Matthew introduces his text of the LP polemically in its immediate context of Matt 6 as an example (or better stated, a model) of a concise, precise and right prayer and within its broader context of Matt 5 – 7 as a central part of Jesus’s teaching to those whose lives are to be reshaped around and by the in-breaking kingdom of God. In other words, right praying and prayer are part and parcel of those upon whom the kingdom of God/heaven has come. Between the exegesis in Part I and the reception in Part IV, two contextually necessary parts were sandwiched, namely Part II and Part III. Part II (i. e. chapter 3) explored the Ghanaian context by defining the study context as one that is limited mainly to the Christian context and the timeline in view is the period following 1957 when Ghana gained political independence. It also discussed factors that influence and shape the larger Ghanaian context, namely socio-religio-cultural, political and economic factors. In addition to

not come across, in any of my sources, a study on the text done in the manner and with the approach adopted in this study. Surely, this claim stands for correction in any event that a similar study exists that did not catch my attention in the course of the research.  A subsequent limitation of the broad objective is that the study could not include reception of the text from the perspective of church members (the laity). This is a fruitful area of research that can be considered by engaging in group/community Bible studies with ordinary church member to find out the role of the text in their lives. As can be seen with Addo Jnr.’s research, such a study will yield interesting receptions of the text.

6 Conclusion

231

that was a brief historical account of Christianity in Ghana limiting it to the three main streams: mainline Christianity, African Instituted Christianity and Pentecostal Charismatic Christianity. An important conclusion from that part of the study is that the study context is variegated—made up of different contextually impinging factors and it is dominated by a pervasive cosmology that allows for an interpenetration of the spiritual and the physical, the imperceptible and the perceptible aspects of existence which influence both private and public life. This worldview allows for recourse to the spiritual aspect of existence for help and support for the daily lived realities of Ghanaians. It was underscored that this worldview in particular exercises significant influences on the interpretation and use of biblical texts in Christianity in Ghana such that a neglect of it in biblical interpretation and its accompanying Christianity (like mainline Christianity did in earlier times) results in serious ramifications. These ramifications include people leaving one Christian stream for another just like members of mainline Christianity in Ghana left (in the late twentieth century) to join the then new streams of Christianity (AIC and PCC) whose rise was equally due to the initial neglect of this cosmology by mainline Christianity. Following on the heels of Part II was Part III (i. e. chapter 4) which had two tasks: 1) a discussion of hermeneutical principles at play in the Ghanaian hermeneutical setting and 2) a presentation of examples of reception of scripture in Ghana. This part was also influenced by the theoretical understanding that reception studies also include a consideration of interpretational principles or methods employed in reading and using texts in any given context. Inculturation biblical hermeneutics, mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics, African feminist biblical hermeneutics, liberation biblical hermeneutics and post-colonial biblical hermeneutics were the hermeneutical approaches discussed. Taking the discussions of these approaches together, it was realised that the general hermeneutical setting in Ghana (and Africa as whole) is reader-centred, i. e. the readers play an active role in the hermeneutical process and the results of the hermeneutical process are aimed at the readers’ contexts and the transformation of those contexts. This is because the stated hermeneutical principles shift, in their application, focus from exegetical considerations to hermeneutical concerns. Such a reader-centred nature of the hermeneutical setting in Ghana has implications for the manner of scripture reception as the results of the study attest. For instance, applying mother-tongue biblical hermeneutics to the bread petition, Ekem (as already stated) can call for governmental policies that will ensure efficient exploitation of national resources to enhance the lots of Ghanaians. He makes this call on the back of his material conception of the bread petition. Accordingly, he moots for a re-reading of the petitions as follows: “Today too, give us that which will be sufficient for us” (Matt 6:11).

232

6 Conclusion

The presentation of two initial examples of scripture reception in Ghana in the second section of Part III provided a preliminary scripture reception in Ghana. For instance, the discussion of Jacobus Capitein’s translation of the LP into Mfantse in the eighteenth century contributed to establishing the point of mother-tongue translations of the Bible being an important medium of scripture reception. In addition, the discussion of Christology in Ghana also provided an important contribution to what scripture reception in Ghana is like. Both discussions also attested to the reader-centredness of the hermeneutical setting in Ghana which provides a fertile ground for interesting receptions of biblical texts. In concluding the study, however, two important points remain to be made: first, an indication of parts of the text that were more emphasised among the reception materials used and second, a proposed Ghanaian reading of the text based on the presentations in six paradigmatic reception areas above. To the first point: It should be acknowledged up front that the emphasis on parts of the text varies from one reception area to the other. For instance, while in the academic discussions the bread petition (Matt 6:11//Luke 11:3) dominates by not only being the sole petition for consideration in two different instances (as in Ekem and Addo Jnr.), but also through that it receives re-readings like, “Today too, give us that which will be sufficient for us” as Ekem suggests and “Give us this day our daily economic resources,” according to Addo Jnr., in the devotional section, the forgiveness petition (Matt 6:12//Luke 11:4a) receives accentuation. These two petitions are said to be more emphasised by the frequency of their occurrence in the considered reception materials. However, another form of emphasis is observed not based on frequency but based on a clear ranking of the petitions in two instances. In one instance,¹⁰⁵⁷ the kingdom and will petitions (Matt 6:10//Luke 11:2c) are considered as most important and in the second instance,¹⁰⁵⁸ the will of God (Matt 6:10b) is considered the most important among all. Therefore, within the reception data itself, one can observe a shift of emphasis from the bread petition in the beginning to the kingdom of God and the will of God close to the end of the study. To the second point. If one were to integrate the re-translations and the new interpretations given to some of the petitions in the reception process into the text of the LP as translated and used in Ghana, the following new reading of the text could be produced:

 See paradigmatic example of reception IV (i. e. devotional books and Christian music).  See paradigmatic example of reception V (i. e. ecumenical documents).

6 Conclusion

233

Our loving Parent who is in the heavens above,¹⁰⁵⁹ You whose name is eternally hallowed,¹⁰⁶⁰ Let your royal dominion come, And your desire will be on earth as it is in heaven above.¹⁰⁶¹ Give us today our abundant socio-economic resources just like you do every day,¹⁰⁶² And let go our behavioural debts just like how we let go the behavioural debts of our neighbours who behaviourally owe us.¹⁰⁶³ And do not allow us to come into temptation, But remove us from the daily evil of the evil one.¹⁰⁶⁴ For the kingdom, the strength and the glory are yours alone eternally, So let it be.¹⁰⁶⁵

This synthesised reading of the text is proposed as a Ghanaian reception reading of the Lord’s Prayer based solely on the reception documents considered in this study and should likewise be understood in this context. In sum, through this study, one gains a glimpse of a life of a key NT text in different cases in Ghana, a text which is not only central to Christianity, but more importantly and reception-historically speaking, whose impact also reaches as far back as early Christianity itself. According to Ulrich Luz, “The study of reception history makes it difficult, if not impossible, to say that this or that interpretation of a biblical text is clearly and definitely false.”¹⁰⁶⁶ If this assertion is anything to go by, then, the receptions of the text as shown in this study culminating in the proposed Ghanaian reading of the text are worth serious consideration.

 This reading is influenced by Akoto’s re-reading of “our Father” as our Parent and by the mother-tongue translations in Sections 5.5 and 5.2 respectively.  Re-read after the Kusaal translation of this part of the text in Subsection 5.2.2.  Influenced mainly by the mother-tongue translations in Section 5.2  This issues from Ekem and Addo Jnr.’s interpretations of the bread petition in Section 5.3 and the Kusaal translation in 5.2.2.  This comes from the Kusaal translation in 5.2.2.  Both parts of this petition are re-phrased based on the mother-tongue translations in Section in 5.2.  This is equally based on the mother-tongue translations in Section in 5.2.  Luz, ‘The Contribution of Reception History to a Theology of the New Testament’, 127.

Bibliography Addo Jnr., John Kwesi. ‘“Give Us this Day Our Daily Bread”: An Exegetical Study of Matthew 6:11 in the Light of Poverty Experience in Gomoa Potsin in the Central Region of Ghana’. Master of Theology Thesis, Trinity Theological Seminary Legon, 2015. Agyinasare, Charles. Power in Prayer: Taking Your Blessings by Force. 2nd ed. Accra: Self Publication, 2013. Akoto, Dorothy B. E. A. Lord Teach Us to Pray. Accra: GAVOSS Education Plc Ltd, 2018. Albrecht, Felix, and Reinhard Feldmeier, eds. The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity. Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions 18. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014. Anaba, Eastwood. Jesus Christ Is Praying for You. Bolgatanga: Desert Leaf Publication, 2015. Anim, Emmanuel. ‘Prosperity Gospel in Ghana and the Primal Imagination’. Trinity Journal of Theology 17, no. 2 (July 2009): 30 – 42. Appiah-Kubi, Kofi. ‘Christology’. In A Reader in African Christian Theology, edited by John Parratt, 65 – 74. Denver, Colorado: iAcademicBooks: International Academic Publishers Ltd., 1997. Aryeh, Daniel N. A. ‘Contemporary Hermeneutics: An Examination of Selected Works of John D. K. Ekem on Mother Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics for the African Context’. The Journal of Inductive Biblical Studies 4, no. 2 (Summer 2017): 182 – 210. Asamoah-Gyadu, Kwabena J. ‘Pentecostalism in Africa’. In African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, 56 – 67. SPCK International Study Guide 46. London: SPCK, 2010. Asamoah-Gyadu, Kwabena J. ‘Anointing through the Screen: Neo-Pentecostalism and Televised Christianity in Ghana’. Studies in World Christianity 11, no. 1 (2005): 9 – 28. Asamoah-Gyadu, Kwabena J. ‘“Christ Is the Answer”: What Is the Question?’: A Ghana Airways Prayer Vigil and Its Implications for Religion, Evil and Public Space’. Journal of Religion in Africa 35, no. 1 (2005): 93 – 117. Asamoah-Gyadu, Kwabena J. Contemporary Pentecostal Christianity: Interpretations from an African Context. Akropong-Akwapem: Regnum Africa, 2013. Ashaley, Frederick Kotey. ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus: A Study of Luke’s Gospel’. Master of Divinity Thesis, Trinity Theological Seminary Legon, 2017. Azumah, John. ‘Controversy and Restraint in Ghana’. Transformation: An International Journal of Holistic Mission Studies 17 (2000): 23 – 26. Bachmann, Michael. ‘“Antithese gegenüber der Bibel”?: Zur halakhischen Argumentation innerhalb der Bergpredigt’. In Er stieg auf den Berg … und lehrte sie (Mt 5,1 f.): Exegetische und rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studien zur Bergpredigt, edited by Hans-Ulrich Weidemann, 71 – 96. Stuttgarter Bibelstudien 226. Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk GmbH, 2012. Baëta, Christian Gonçalves. Prophetism in Ghana: A Study of Some ‘spiritual’ Churches. World Mission Studies. London: SCM Press, 1962. Balz, Horst, and Gerhard Schneider, eds. Exegetisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament. 3 vols. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1980 – 1983. Bauer, Walter. Griechisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frühchristlichen Literatur. Edited by Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland. 6th ed. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1988.

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-009

Bibliography

235

Beal, Timothy. ‘Reception History and beyond: Toward the Cultural History of Scriptures’. Biblical Interpretation 19, no. 4 – 5 (2011): 357 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1163/ 156851511X595530. Bediako, Kwame. ‘Biblical Exegesis in Africa: The Significance of the Translated Scriptures’. In African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, edited by Diane B. Stinton, 12 – 20. SPCK International Study Guide 46. London: SPCK, 2010. Bediako, Kwame. Christianity in Africa: The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion. Trends in African Christianity. Akropong-Akwapem: Regnum Africa, 2014. Bediako, Kwame. Jesus in Africa: The Christian Gospel in African History and Experience. 2nd ed. Theological Reflections from the South. Akropong-Akwapem: Regnum Africa, 2013. Bell, Judith. Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-Time Researchers in Education, Health and Social Science. 5th ed. Berkshire: Open University Press, 2010. Berger, Klaus. Formgeschichte des Neuen Testaments. Heidelberg: Quelle & Meyer, 1984. Berthelette, John. ‘Sociolinguistic Survey Report for the Kusaal Language’. SIL International, 2001, 56. Blumenthal, Christian. Basileia im Matthäusevangelium. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 416. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019. Boateng, Eric Oti. The Supernatural Power behind Prayer. Accra: Self Publication, 2017. Boring, M. Eugene. An Introduction to the New Testament: History, Literature, Theology. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2012. Bormann, Lukas. Theologie des Neuen Testaments: Grundlinien und wichtigste Ergebnisse der Internationalen Forschung. Basiswissen Theologie und Religionswissenschaft. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017. Bovon, François. Das Evangelium nach Lukas: Lk 9,51 – 14,35. Edited by Norbert Brox, Josef Blank, Eduard Schweizer, and Rudolf Schnackenburg. Vol. 2. Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 3. Zürich: Düsseldorf: Benziger: Neukirchener, 1996. Breed, Brennan W. Nomadic Text: A Theory of Biblical Reception History. Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2014. Charlesworth, James H. ‘A Caveat on Textual Transmission and the Meaning of Abba: A Study of the Lord’s Prayer’. In The Lord’s Prayer and Other Prayer Texts from the Greco-Roman Era, edited by James H. Charlesworth, 1 – 14. Valley Forge, Pa: Trinity Press International, 1994. Christaller, J. G. Dictionary of the Asante and Fante Language: Called Tschi (Twi). 2nd ed. Basel: Basel Evangelical Missionary Society, 1933. Christian Council of Ghana. ‘Become a Member: Membership Procedure’. Accessed 15 September 2018. http://www.christiancouncilofghana.org/pages/become-a-member. php. Christian Council of Ghana. ‘History | Christian Council of Ghana’. Accessed 15 May 2018. http://www.christiancouncilgh.org/pages/history.php. Christian Council of Ghana. What Church Members Should Know. Accra: Asempa Publishers, 2017. Clark, David. ‘Exploring Metaphors for the Reception History of the Lord’s Prayer’. Journal of the Bible and Its Reception 6, no. 1 (24 April 2019): 39 – 65. https://doi.org/10.1515/jbr2019-1001. Cleaver, Laura, and Andrea Worm. ‘The Septenarium Pictum or Rota Dominice Orationis Diagram: Combatting Vice through Prayer in the High Middle Ages’. In Ordinare Il

236

Bibliography

Mondo: Diagrammi e Simboli Nelle Pergamene Di Vercelli, 265 – 88. Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 2018. Constitution of the Republic of Ghana 1992. Accra: Ghana Publishing Company Ltd., 1992. Dickson, Kwesi A. ‘The Church and the Quest for Democracy in Ghana’. In The Christian Churches and the Democratisation of Africa, edited by Paul Gifford, 261 – 75. Studies of Religion in Africa 12. Leiden; New York; Köln: E. J. Brill, 1995. Doering, Lutz. ‘God as Father in Texts from Qumran’. In The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, edited by Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, 107 – 35. Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions, 18. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014. Dube Shomanah, Musa W. ‘Praying the Lord’s Prayer in a Global Economic Era’. The Ecumenical Review 49, no. 4 (1 October 1997): 439 – 50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17586623.1997.tb00307.x. Duncan-Williams, Nicholas. Praying Strategic Prayers. Accra: Rhema Publisher, n.d. Eberhard, David M, Gary F Simons, and Charles D Fennig, eds. Ethnologue: Languages of the World. 22nd ed. Dallas, Texas: SIL International, 2019. https://www.ethnologue.com/lan guage/kus. Eddyshaw, David. A Grammar of Kusaal: Agolle Dialect. Swansea, 2019. https://www.academ ia.edu/30678520/A_Grammar_of_Kusaal. Ekem, John D. K. Early Scriptures of the Gold Coast (Ghana): The Historical, Linguistic, and Theological Settings of the Ga, Twi, Mfantse, and Ewe Bibles. History of Bible Translation 2. United Kingdom: St. Jerome Publishing, 2011. Ekem, John D. K. ‘Early Translators and Interpreters of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures on the Gold Coast: Two Case Studies’. Journal of African Christian Thought 13, no. 2 (December 2010): 34 – 37. Ekem, John D. K. Interpretation of ‘Scripture’ in Some New Testament Documents: Lessons for the Ghanaian Context. Accra: African Christian Press, 2015. Ekem, John D. K. ‘Interpreting the Lord’s Prayer in the Context of Ghanaian Mother-Tongue Hermeneutics’. Journal of African Christian Thought 10, no. 2 (December 2007): 48 – 52. Ekem, John D. K. ‘Jacobus Capitein’s Translation of the Lord’s Prayer into Mfantse: An Example of Creative Mother Tongue Hermeneutics’. The Ghana Bulletin of Theology 2 (2007): 66 – 79. Ekem, John D. K. ‘Mother Tongue Commentaries on New Testament Texts in a Ghanaian Context’. Göttingen, 4 October 2018. Ekem, John D. K. Priesthood in Context: A Study of Priesthood in Some Christian and Primal Communities of Ghana and Its Relevance for Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics. Accra: SonLife Press, 2009. Ekem, John D. K. ‘Professorial Chair Inaugural Address’. Journal of Mother Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics 1, no. 1 (May 2015): 158 – 74. Evans, Craig A. Matthew. New Cambridge Bible Commentary. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Evans, Robert. Reception History, Tradition and Biblical Interpretation: Gadamer and Jauss in Current Practice. The Library of New Testament Studies. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014.

Bibliography

237

Feldmeier, Reinhard. ‘Die synoptischen Evangelien’. In Grundinformation Neues Testament: Eine bibelkundlich-theologische Einführung, 4th ed., 75 – 142. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Feldmeier, Reinhard. ‘“Geheiligt werde dein Name”: Das Herrengebet im Kontext der paganen Gebetsliteratur’. In Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, 25 – 81. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, 266. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Feldmeier, Reinhard. The First Letter of Peter: A Commentary of the Greek Text. Translated by Peter H. Davids. Waco, Tex: Baylor University Press, 2008. Feldmeier, Reinhard. ‘Verpflichtende Gnade: Die Bergpredigt im Kontext des ersten Evangeliums’. In Salz der Erde: Zugänge zur Bergpredigt, edited by Reinhard Feldmeier, 15 – 108. Biblisch-Theologische Schwerpunkte 14. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. Feldmeier, Reinhard, and Hermann Spieckermann. God of the Living: A Biblical Theology. Translated by Mark E. Biddle. Waco, Tex: Baylor University Press, 2011. Ferrari, Franco. ‘Gott als Vater und Schöpfer: Zur Rezeption von Timaios 28c3 – 5 bei einigen Platonikern’. In The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, edited by Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, 57 – 69. Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions, 18. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014. Frey, Jörg. ‘Das Vaterunser im Horizont antik-jüdischen Betens unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Textfunde vom Toten Meer’. In Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, edited by Florian Wilk, 1 – 24. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, 266. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Mohr, 1960. Ganusah, Rebecca Y. ‘Pouring Libation to Spirit Powers among the Ewe-Dome of Ghana: An Indigeneous Religious and Biblical Perspective’. In The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories and Trends, edited by Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube. Leiden. Boston. Köln: Brill, 2000. Gavin and Louise. ‘Zulu Worship Chord Charts: Amen – Joe Mettle and Ntokozo Mbambo’. Zulu Worship Chord Charts (blog), 10 May 2018. http://zuluworship.blogspot.com/2018/ 05/amen-joe-mettle-and-ntokozo-mbambo.html. Ghana Pentecostal and Charismatic Council. ‘History and Background | GPCC’. Accessed 19 September 2018. https://gpccghana.org/history-and-background/. Gifford, Paul. African Christianity: Its Public Role. London: C. Hurst & Co. Ltd., 1998. Gifford, Paul. ‘Ghana’s Charismatic Churches’. Journal of Religion in Africa 24, no. 3 (1994): 241 – 65. https://doi.org/10.2307/1581301. Goulder, M. D. ‘The Composition of the Lord’s Prayer’. Journal of Theological Studies; London 14 (1 January 1963): 32 – 45. Grimm, Gunter, ed. Literatur und Leser: Theorien und Modelle zur Rezeption literarischer Werke. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1975. Grimm, Werner. Die Motive Jesu: Das Vaterunser/kommentiert und ausgelegt. Biblischtheologische Grundlagen 1. Stuttgart: Calwer Verl., 1992.

238

Bibliography

Gunda, Masiiwa Ragies. ‘Reception History of the Bible: Prospects of a New Frontier in African Biblical Studies’. In Reception History and Biblical Studies: Theory and Practice, edited by Emma England and William John Lyons, 125 – 38. London: Bloomsbury, 2015. Gyekye, Kwame. An Essay on African Philosophical Thought: The Akan Conceptual Scheme. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Haaf, Ernst. Die Kusase: Eine medizinisch-ethnologische Studie über einen Stamm in Nordghana. Giessener Beiträge Zur Entwicklungsforschung 1. Stuttgart: Fischer, 1967. Haar, Gerrie ter. ‘Standing Up for Jesus: A Survey of New Developments in Christianity in Ghana’. Exchange 23, no. 3 (December 1994): 221 – 40. Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 1 – 13. Edited by David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker, and Bruce Manning Metzger. Word Bible Commentary 33 A. Waco, Tex.: Word Books, Publ., 1993. Hardwick, Lorna. Reception Studies. New Surveys in the Classics 33. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2003. Hemer, Colin. ‘Έπιούσιος’. Journal for the Study of the New Testament 7, no. 22 (October 1984): 81 – 94. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142064X8400702205. Heward-Mills, Dag. How to Pray. Accra: Parchment House, 2013. Hoffmann, Paul, Thomas Hieke, and Ulrich Bauer. Synoptic Concordance: A Greek Concordance to the First Three Gospels in Synoptic Arrangement, Statistically Evaluated, Including Occurrences in Acts. Vol. 3 (K-O). Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2000. Hofius, O. ‘Vater (Πατήρ)’. In Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, 1721 – 28. Wuppertal: R. Brockhaus Verlag, 2000. Instone‐Brewer, David. ‘The Eighteen Benedictions and the Minim before 70 CE’. The Journal of Theological Studies 54, no. 1 (1 April 2003): 25 – 44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/54.1. 25. Jauß, Hans Robert. Die Theorie der Rezeption – Rückschau auf ihre unerkannte Vorgeschichte. Konstanzer Universitätsreden 166. Konstanz: Universitätsverlag, 1987. Jauß, Hans Robert. Literaturgeschichte als Provokation. 2nd ed. Edition Suhrkamp 418. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1970. Jenkins, Paul. ‘The Anglican Church in Ghana, 1905 – 1924 (Part One)’. Transactions of the Historical Society of Ghana 15, no. 1 (1974): 23 – 39. Jeremias, Joachim. Abba: Studien zur neutestamentlichen Theologie und Zeitgeschichte. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. Jeremias, Joachim. Das Vater-Unser im Lichte der neueren Forschung. 4th ed. Calwer Hefte zur Förderung biblischen Glaubens und christlichen Lebens 50. Stuttgart: Calwer Verl., 1967. Jeremias, Joachim. ‘The Lord’s Prayer in Modern Research’. The Expository Times 71, no. 5 (February 1960): 141 – 46. https://doi.org/10.1177/001452466007100504. Kahl, Werner. Jesus als Lebensretter: Westafrikanische Bibelinterpretationen und ihre Relevanz für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft. New Testament Studies in Contextual Exegesis 2. Frankfurt am Main: Lang, 2007. Kahl, Werner. ‘Jesus Power Super Power-Productive Friction in Intercultural Hermeneutics: A German Perspective’. Journal of Mother Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics 1, no. 1 (2015): 78 – 109. Kistemaker, Simon. ‘Lord’s Prayer in the First Century’. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 21, no. 4 (December 1978): 323 – 28.

Bibliography

239

Kittel, Gerhard, and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publ. Co, 1964 – 1976. Kittel, Gerhard, and Gerhard Friedrich, eds. Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament. 10 vols. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1933 – 1979. Klein, Hans. Das Lukasevangelium. Edited by Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer and DietrichAlex Koch. 10th ed. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006. Kloppenborg, John S. The Formation of Q: Trajectories in Ancient Wisdom Collections. Studies in Antiquity and Christianity. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. Knight, Mark. ‘Wirkungsgeschichte, Reception History, Reception Theory’. Journal for the Study of the New Testament 33, no. 2 (1 December 2010): 137 – 46. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0142064X10385858. Konradt, Matthias. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015. Kuhn, Karl Georg. Achtzehngebet und Vaterunser und der Reim. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 1. Tübingen: Mohr, 1950. Kuma, Afua. Ayeyi ne mpaebᴐ: Kwaebirentuw ase Yesu. Accra: Asempa Publishers, 1980. Kuma, Afua. Jesus of the Deep Forest: Prayers and Praises of Afua Kuma. Translated by Jon Kirby. Accra: Asempa Publishers, 1980. Kuwornu-Adjaottor, Jonathan E T. ‘Assessment of Three Problematic Texts in the Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament of the Dangme Bible’. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, 2018. Kuwornu-Adjaottor, Jonathan E T. ‘Doing African Biblical Studies with Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics Approach’. All Nations University Journal of Applied Thought 1, no. 1 (2012). Kuwornu-Adjaottor, Jonathan E T. ‘Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics: A Current Trend in Biblical Studies in Ghana’. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies 3, no. 4 (2012): 575 – 79. Landefeld, Katrin Maria. Die Gebetslehre Epiktets: Form, Inhalt und Funktionen der Gebete Epiktets im Kontext der antiken Gebetstradition. Orbis Antiquus 54. Münster: Aschendorff Verlag, 2020. Laryea, Philip T. ‘Mother-Tongue Theology: Reflections on Images of Jesus in the Poetry of Afua Kuma’. Journal of African Christian Thought 3, no. 1 (June 2000): 50 – 60. Laryea, Philip T. ‘Reading Acts 14:8 – 17 & 17:22 – 31 in Ga: A Critical Examination of the Issues, Meanings, Interpretations Arising from Exegesis in the Mother-Tongue’. Journal of African Christian Thought 6, no. 1 (June 2003): 35 – 43. Lochman, Jan Milič. The Lord’s Prayer. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990. Lohfink, Gerhard. Das Vaterunser neu ausgelegt. 3rd ed. Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk GmbH, 2015. Lohmeyer, Ernst. The Lord’s Prayer. Translated by John Bowden. London: Collins, 1965. Lohse, Eduard. Vater Unser: Das Gebet der Christen. 2nd ed. Darmstadt: Wiss. Buchges., 2012. ‘Lord’s Prayer’. In Encyclopedia of the Bible and Its Reception Online, 16:1121 – 48. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2018. https://db.degruyter.com/view/EBR/MainLemma_7590. Luz, Ulrich. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus: Mt 1 – 7. 5th ed. Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 1. Düsseldorf: Benziger, 2002.

240

Bibliography

Luz, Ulrich. Matthew 1 – 7: A Commentary. Edited by Helmut Koester. Translated by James E. Crouch. Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007. Luz, Ulrich. ‘The Contribution of Reception History to a Theology of the New Testament’. In The Nature of New Testament Theology: Essays in Honour of Robert Morgan, edited by C Rowland, C. M. Tuckett, and R. Morgan, 123 – 34. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2008. https:// doi.org/10.1002/9780470773789.ch8. Martin, Michael Wade. ‘The Poetry of the Lord’s Prayer: A Study in Poetic Device’. Journal of Biblical Literature 134, no. 2 (2015): 347 – 72. https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1342.2015. 2804. Mbillah, John A. ‘An African Reflection on A Common Word’. In We Have Justice in Common: Christian and Muslim Voices from Asia and Africa, edited by C. W. SJ. Troll, H. Reifeld, and C. T. R. Hewer, 87 – 106. Berlin: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e.V., 2010. Mbuvi, Andrew M. ‘African Biblical Studies: An Introduction to an Emerging Discipline’. Currents in Biblical Research 15, no. 2 (2017): 149 – 78. Metzger, Bruce M. ‘How Many Times Does “Epiousios” Occur Outside the Lord’s Prayer?’ The Expository Times 69, no. 2 (November 1957): 52 – 54. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 001452465706900208. Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration. Oxford: Clarendon Pr., 1964. Migliore, Daniel L. Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology. 3rd ed. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2014. Mintah, Joyce Afia Adubea. ‘The Role of Prayer in the Ministry of Jesus Christ: A Study of the Gospel of Luke’. Master of Philosophy Thesis, University of Ghana Legon, 2014. Morgenthaler, Robert. Statistik des neutestamentlichen Wortschatzes. 3rd ed. Zürich: Gotthelf, 1982. Mugambi, Jesse N. K. ‘Theology of Reconstruction’. In African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, edited by Diane B. Stinton. SPCK International Study Guide 46. London: SPCK, 2010. Musah, Agoswin, A. A Grammar of Kusaal: A Mabia (Gur) Language of Northern Ghana. Schriften zur Afrikanistik/Research in African Studies 27. Berlin: Peter Lang, 2018. NaCCA. ‘Religious and Moral Education: Curriculum for Primary Schools (Basic 1 – 6)’. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, Ministry of Education Ghana, September 2019. Nesselrath, Heinz-Günther. ‘“Vater Zeus” im griechischen Epos’. In The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, edited by Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, 37 – 55. Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions, 18. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014. Neumann, James N. ‘Thy Will Be Done: Jesus’s Passion in the Lord’s Prayer’. Journal of Biblical Literature 138, no. 1 (2019): 161 – 82. https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1381.2019. 524397. Neumann, Nils. ‘Die Anschaulichkeit der Rede Jesu: Ein Beitrag zur Rhetorik der Bergpredigt’. In The Gospel of Matthew at the Crossroads of Early Christianity, edited by Donald Senior, 622 – 236. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CCXLIII. Leuven-Paris-Walpole, MA: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2011. Ngong, David T. ‘Reading the Bible in Africa: A Critique of the Enchanted Bible Reading’. Exchange 43 (2014): 174 – 91.

Bibliography

241

Niederwimmer, Kurt. The Didache: A Commentary. Edited by Harold W. Attridge. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998. Nolland, John. The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, Mich: W.B. Eerdmans Pub. Co, 2005. Norsiah, Nyamekeh. Simplified Religious & Moral Education: For Primary 5. Accra: Vestel Publications, 2016. Nukunya, Godwin K. Tradition and Change in Ghana: An Introduction to Sociology. 2nd ed. Accra: Ghana Universities Press, 2003. Ocloo, Christian B. Forgive as You Have Been Forgiven. Living the Practical Christian Life. Accra: Asempa Publishers, 2014. Oduro, Thomas A. Church of the Lord (Brotherhood): History, Challenges and Growth. 2nd ed. Accra: SonLife Printing Press, 2016. Oduyoye, Mercy Amba. Introducing African Women’s Theology. Introductions in Feminist Theology 6. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Omenyo, Cephas. ‘The Charismatic Renewal Movement in Ghana’. Pneuma 16, no. 1 (1 January 1994): 169 – 85. https://doi.org/10.1163/157007494X00166. Omenyo, Cephas Narh. Pentecost Outside Pentecostalism: A Study of the Development of Charismatic Renewal in the Mainline Churches in Ghana. Mission: Missiologisch Onderzoek in Nederland 32. Zoetermeer: Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 2002. Orobator, Agbonkhianmeghe E. ‘Contextual Theological Methodologies’. In African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, edited by Diane B. Stinton. SPCK International Study Guide 46. London: SPCK, 2010. Osei-Akoto, Eric N. ‘God “Has Not Left Himself without Witness…”: Evidences of the Witness of God in the Akan Pre-Christian Heritage of Prayer’. Journal of African Christian Thought 20, no. 1 (June 2017): 49 – 56. Osten-Sacken, Peter von der. ‘Das Vaterunser als Zugang zum Matthäusevangelium: Das Beispiel der Vergebungsbitte’. In Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, edited by Florian Wilk, 103 – 24. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, 266. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Parsons, Robert T. The Churches and Ghana Society 1918 – 1955: A Survey of the Work of Three Protestant Mission Societies and the African Churches Which They Established in Their Assistance to Societary Development. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963. Pentecost Health Services. ‘Pentecost Health Services | The Church of Pentecost’. Accessed 19 September 2018. http://www.thecophq.org/index.php/pentecost-health-services/. Pentecost Schools. ‘Pentecost Schools | The Church of Pentecost’. Accessed 19 September 2018. http://www.thecophq.org/index.php/pentecost-schools/. Philonenko, Marc. Das Vaterunser: Vom Gebet Jesu zum Gebet der Jünger. UTB 2312. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002. Phiri, Isabel A., and Sarojini Nadar. ‘African Women’s Theologies’. In African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, edited by Diane B. Stinton, 90 – 100. SPCK International Study Guide 46. London: SPCK, 2010. Pobee, John S. Toward an African Theology. Nashville, Tenn.: Abingdon, 1979. Presbyterian Church of Ghana. The English Catechism. Accra: Waterville Publ. House, 2015.

242

Bibliography

Presbyterian Church of Ghana. Worship Book: Ordinances. Accra: Waterville Publ. House, 2010. Quarshie, B. Y. ‘Doing Biblical Studies in the African Context: The Challenge of Mother-Tongue Scriptures’. Journal of African Christian Thought 5, no. 1 (June 2002): 4 – 14. Rehm, Ulrich. ‘Die bildliche Auslegung des Vaterunsers im Mittelalter’. In Vater Unser im Himmel: Das Gebet des Herrn, edited by Florian Trenner, 92 – 103. München: Klerusblatt, 2004. https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/artdok/2864/1/Rehm_Die_bildliche_Ausle gung_des_Vaterunser_im_Mittelalter_2004.pdf. Robinson, James McConkey, Paul Hoffmann, and John S. Kloppenborg, eds. The Critical Edition of Q: Synopsis Including the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mark and Thomas with English, German, and French Translations of Q and Thomas. Hermeneia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000. Rowland, Chris. ‘A Pragmatic Approach to Wirkungsgeschichte: Reflections on the Blackwell Bible Commentary Series and on the Writing of Its Commentary on the Apocalypse’. Paper presented at the Society of Biblical Literature meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 2004. http://bbibcomm.info/?page_id=183. Sawyer, John F. A. ‘The Role of Reception Theory, Reader-Response Criticism and/or Impact History in the Study of the Bible: Definition and Evaluation’. Paper presented at the Society of Biblical Literature meeting, San Antonio, Texas, 2004. http://bbibcomm.info/? page_id=183. Schattner-Rieser, Ursula. ‘Das Aramäische zur Zeit Jesu, “ABBA!” und das Vaterunser: Reflexionen zur Muttersprache Jesu anhand der Texte von Qumran und der frühen Targumim’. In Jesus, Paul, and the Qumran Texts, edited by Jörg Frey, Enno Edzard Popkes, and Sophie Tätweiler, 81 – 144. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2 390. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015. Schnelle, Udo. Das Evangelium nach Johannes. 5th ed. Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 4. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 2016. Schnelle, Udo. Einführung in die neutestamentliche Exegese. 8th ed. UTB 1253. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. Schnelle, Udo. Theologie des Neuen Testaments. 3rd ed. UTB: Theologie, Religion 2917. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Smith, Daniel A. ‘“Pray to Your Father [Who Is] in Secret” (Matthew 6,6): Considerations about Divine Presence and Sacred Space’. In The Gospel of Matthew at the Crossroads of Early Christianity, edited by Donald Senior, 653 – 63. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, CCXLIII. Leuven-Paris-Walpole, MA: Uitgeverij Peeters, 2011. Soku, Leonard. Biblical Fasting & Prayer. 3rd ed. Accra: Warzone Publication, 2016. Spieckermann, Hermann. ‘The “Father” of the Old Testament and Its History’. In The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, edited by Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier. Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions, 18. Leiden: Brill, 2014. St. Jerome. Book One (Matthew 1.1 – 10.42). Translated by Thomas P. Scheck. The Fathers of the Church 117. Washington, D.C: Catholic University of America Press, 2010. Stritzky, Maria-Barbara. Studien zur Überlieferung und Interpretation des Vaterunsers in der frühchristlichen Literatur. Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie 57. Münster: Aschendorff, 1989.

Bibliography

243

Stückrath, Jörn. Historische Rezeptionsforschung: Ein kritischer Versuch zu ihrer Geschichte und Theorie. Stuttgart: Metzler, 1979. Sule-Saa, Solomon S. ‘The Redemptive Role of Mother-Tongue Scriptures: The Case of the Dagomba and Konkomba of Northern Ghana’. Journal of African Christian Thought 11, no. 1 (June 2008): 18 – 29. Tette, Edem. The Quiet Time. Accra: Asempa Publishers, 2011. Theophilus, Dent-Augustine. Religious and Moral Education for Basic Six (6) Pupils. Victory Series. Kumasi: NABAF Victory Publishers, 2019. Tomson, Peter T. ‘The Lord’s Prayer (Didache 8) at the Faultline of Judaism and Christianity’. In The Didache: A Missing Piece of the Puzzle in Early Christianity, edited by Jonathan A. Draper and Clayton N. Jefford, 165 – 87. Early Christianity and Its Literature 14. Atlanta: SBL Press, 2015. Tuckett, Christopher M. From the Sayings to the Gospels. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 328. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014. Tuckett, Christopher M. Q and the History of Early Christianity: Studies on Q. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996. Ukpong, Justin. ‘Inculturation Hermeneutics: An African Approach to Biblical Interpretation’. In The Bible in a World Context: An Experiment in Contextual Hermeneutics, edited by Walter Dietrich and Ulrich Luz. Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2002. Ukpong, Justin S. ‘Developments in Biblical Interpretation in Africa: Historical and Hermeneutical Directions’. In The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories and Trends, edited by Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube, 11 – 28. Leiden. Boston. Köln: Brill, 2000. Ukpong, Justin S. ‘Towards a Holistic Approach to Inculturation Theology’. Mission Studies 16, no. 2 (1999): 100 – 124. Van Tilborg, S. ‘A Form-Criticism of the Lord’s Prayer’. Novum Testamentum 14, no. 2 (1972): 94 – 105. https://doi.org/10.2307/1560176. Wandusim, Michael Fuseini. ‘Young People and Interreligious Dialogue: The Perspective of Young People on Interreligious Dialogue in the Context of Christian-Muslim Dialogue in Ghana’. Master of Arts Thesis, Georg-August Universität Göttingen, 2016. Wehnert, Jürgen. ‘Ein Gebet für alle christliche Gemeinden: Zum Vaterunser in der Didache’. In Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, 143 – 62. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, 266. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Wengst, Klaus. Das Regierungsprogramm des Himmelreichs: Eine Auslegung der Bergpredigt in ihrem jüdischen Kontext. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2010. Wenham, David. ‘The Sevenfold Form of the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew’s Gospel’. Expository Times 8 (1 May 2010): 377 – 82. West, Gerald. ‘Biblical Hermeneutics in Africa’. In African Theology on the Way: Current Conversations, edited by Diane B. Stinton, 21 – 31. SPCK International Study Guide 46. London: SPCK, 2010. West, Gerald O., and Musa W. Dube, eds. The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories, and Trends. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Westermann, Claus. Genesis 12 – 36. Vol. I. Biblischer Kommentar Altes Testament 2. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verl., 1981. Wiefel, Wolfgang. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 1. Berlin: Evang. Verl.-Anst., 1998.

244

Bibliography

Wilk, Florian. ‘“So sollt ihr beten …”: Das Vaterunser als Element der frühen Jesusüberlieferung’. In Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, 83 – 102. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, 266. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Wilk, Florian. ‘“Vater…”. Zur Bedeutung der Anrede Gottes als Vater in den Gebeten der Jesusüberlieferung’. In The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity, edited by Felix Albrecht and Reinhard Feldmeier, 201 – 31. Themes in Biblical Narrative: Jewish and Christian Traditions, 18. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014. Wolter, Michael. ‘Das Gebet der Jünger: Das Vaterunser im Lukasevangelium (Lk 11,2c – 4)’. In Das Vaterunser in seinen antiken Kontexten: Zum Gedenken an Eduard Lohse, edited by Florian Wilk,125 – 42. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments, 266. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Zumstein, Jean. Das Johannesevangelium. 1st ed. Kritisch-Exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016.

Index of References 1 Bible Hebrew Bible Genesis – 3:1 – 19 62, 75 – 17:5 67 – 17:15 – 16 67 – 22:1 – 19 61 – 28:20 – 22 76 – 32:27 – 28 67 Exodus – 3:14 – 15 67 – 3:14 68 – 4:22 51 – 6:3 68 – 12:8 – 11 76 – 16 58, 60, 76 – 16:4 61 – 17:1 – 7 (LXX) 62 – 20:7 68 – 34:6 – 7 82 – 34:9 82 Leviticus – 24:5 – 9 76 – 24:12 76 – 21:6 68 – 22:2 68 – 22:32 68 – 18:21 68 – 20:3 68 Deuteronomy – 5:11 67 – 6:4 – 7 45 – 46 – 6:16 62 – 9:22 62 – 12:11 68 – 14:1 51 – 14:23 68 – 15:2 81 – 32:6 51 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-010

Judges – 2:22 – 23

61

2 Samuel – 7:14 51 – 7:16 51 1 Chronicles – 17:1 – 14 51 – 29:11 – 13 93 Psalms – 2:7 51 – 17:13b 90 – 24:7 – 10 71 – 34:15 88 – 89 52 – 93:1 – 2 71 – 97:1 71 – 103:13 – 14 52 – 103:51 – 106 93 – 130:3 – 4 82 – 136:25 76 – 139:23 – 24 62 – 140:1 90 – 145 71 – 145:15 76 – 146:6 71 – 150 71 Proverbs – 16:9 88 – 20:24 88 – 30:7 – 9 58 Isaiah – 1:8 82 – 11:2 – 3 1 – 29:23 68 – 38:17 82

246

Index of References

– 40:2 82 – 43:25 82 – 48:17 90 – 52:7 71 – 53 83 – 58:7 77 – 59:2 81 – 63:7 – 64:11 49, 52 – 63:16 49, 68, 90 – 64:9 82 Jeremiah – 31:34 82 – 34:16 68 Ezekiel – 36:16 – 24 – 39:7 68

68

Daniel – 6:10 46 – 9:9 82 Amos – 2:7

68

Malachi – 1:6 51 – 2:10 51

New Testament Matthew – 1:21 69, 83 – 4:1 64, 89 – 4:1 – 11 64 – 4:3 89 – 4:17 71, 73 – 4:23 – 9:35 19 – 5 – 7 19 – 20, 23, 35 – 36, 42, 175, 230 – 5:3 72 – 5:3 – 11 1 – 5:10 72 – 5:12 38, 43 – 5:16 22, 28, 43, 56 – 5:20 23 – 25, 32, 57, 72 – 5:23 – 24 84

– 5:34 – 35 70 – 5:37 92 – 5:44 – 45 57, 69 – 5:45 22 – 23, 43, 57, 175 – 5:48 22, 56, 69 – 6:1 22, 43 – 6:1 – 18 19, 22 – 24, 27 – 28, 32 – 6:4 56 – 6:5 32 – 6:6 22 – 23, 25, 49 – 6:7 32 – 6:8 26, 32, 65, 216 – 6:9 1, 16, 28, 33, 42, 50, 173, 207, 214 – 6:9 – 13 10, 19 – 20, 24, 27, 32, 57, 221, 224 – 225 – 6:10 43, 74, 207, 214, 227, 232 – 6:11 4, 35, 50, 175, 188, 193 – 194, 209, 231 – 6:12 17, 19, 33 – 34, 188, 209, 217, 219 – 6:13 38, 50, 175 – 6:14 – 15 19, 84, 199 – 6:20 43 – 6:25 – 32 57 – 6:26 – 29 66, 77 – 6:26 – 30 78 – 79 – 6:30 28, 66 – 6:32 65 – 6:33 72 – 6:34 78 – 7:11 22, 43, 66 – 7:21 22 – 23, 43, 72 – 74 – 7:28 – 29 22, 36 – 7:29 23, 25, 32 – 8:11 60 – 9:2 – 8 83 – 11:25 – 27 55 – 12:28 71 – 72, 207 – 12:50 43, 74 – 13 72 – 13:19 89, 92 – 13:38 92 – 14:13 – 21 77, 105 – 14:16 – 21 78 – 15:32 – 39 77 – 78, 105 – 15:32 79 – 16:1 64 – 16:13b 157

Index of References

– 18:14 43, 74 – 18:15 – 22 84 – 18:23 – 35 84 – 85 – 18:35 85 – 19:3 64 – 21:31 43 – 22:18 64 – 22:35 64 – 26:26 – 29 77 – 26:28 83 – 26:41 64, 87 – 26:42 43, 74 – 28:18 – 20 69, 71 Mark – 1:12 64, 188 – 1:13 89 – 1:15 71 – 4:15 92 – 6:32 – 44 77 – 8:1 – 10 77 – 8:27 157 – 11:25 85 – 13 64 – 13:19 88 – 14:25 60 – 14:22 – 25 77 – 14:32 – 42 55 – 14:38 64 Luke – 4:1 – 13 64 – 4:2 89 – 4:18 – 19 160 – 6:20 72 – 6:20 – 49 35, 42 – 8:12 92 – 8:13 64 – 9:10 – 17 77 – 9:18 157 – 10:9 71 – 10:21 – 22 55 – 11:1 – 8 190 – 11:1 35 – 11:1 – 2 42 – 11:2 1, 207, 214, 227 – 11:2b–4 6, 10, 37 – 38

– 11:3 – 4 207, 227 – 11:3 4, 35, 175, 188, 209, 214 – 11:4 35, 87, 209, 217, 219 – 11:20 71 – 17:20 71 – 17:21 72 – 18:1 – 14 190 – 21:31 72 – 22:30 60 – 22:40 64 – 22:46 64 – 24:25 188 John – 4:34 74 – 5:30 74 – 6:38 74 – 6:51 78 – 17:15 91 Acts – 1:6 – 8 72 – 1:20 44 – 2:38 83 – 3:1 44, 46 – 5:9 62 – 7:26 59 – 10:3 45 – 10:30 45 – 16:11 59 – 20:15 59 – 21:18 59 – 23:11 59 – 27:35 77 Romans – 4:4 81 – 5:12 – 21 83 – 8:15 55 – 8:15 – 17 55 – 8:19 – 23 55 – 11:9 43 – 11:36 93 1 Corinthians – 4:20 207 – 7:11 – 13 81

247

248

– 10:13 – 15:24 – 15:28

Index of References

65 69 70

Hebrews – 12:2 75

2 Corinthians – 5:19 156 – 8:5 74 Galatians – 4:6 55

James – 1:2 – 4 63 – 1:12 63 – 1:13 63 – 2:2 44 1 Peter – 1:6 – 7 63 – 1:14 55 – 1:23 – 2:3 55 – 2:15 75 – 3:12 88 – 4:12 – 13 63 – 5:8 92

Ephesians – 4:6 70 – 6:12 131 – 6:16 92 Colossians – 3:13 217 1 Thessalonians – 4:3 74 – 5:18 74 2 Thessalonians – 2:8 92 – 3:3 92 – 3:12 77 1 Timothy – 2:5 – 6 163 – 6:9 – 10 63 2 Timothy – 4:18 89, 92

2 Peter – 2:9 89 – 2:9 – 10 63 1 John – 1:8 – 10

83

Revelations – 1:6 93 – 3:10 64, 88 – 4:11 93 – 7:16 – 17 80 – 11:15 72 – 11:17 72 – 19:6 93

2 Deuterocanonical Works Tobit – 13:4 – 13:6

52 82

Judith – 8:27

62

Wisdom – 2:12 – 14

– 2:16 – 20 52 – 3:5 – 6 62 – 11:9 – 10 62 – 16:8 91 Sirach – 4:17 62 – 23:1 – 6 52 52

Index of References

– 28:2 84 – 44:20 62

1 Maccabees – 2:52 62 – 3:60 73

3 Dead Sea Scrolls – 1QH 45 – 4Q372 1 16

– 4Q460 9 I 2 – 6 52

4 Apostolic Fathers Didache – 8:2 33, 58

– 8:3

46

52

249

Index of Names Addo Jnr., John Kwesi 193 – 195 Adjei, Ebenezer 205 Afua Kuma 166 – 171 Agyinasare, Charles 137, 206 – 207, 209 – 213, 225, 227 Akoto, Dorothy B. A. 212 – 216, 218, 227, 229 Anaba, Eastwood 206 Anim, Emmanuel 133 Appiah-Kubi, Kofi 157 – 159, 161, 163, 166 Asamoah-Gyadu, Kwabena 104, 127 – 130, 132, 136, 138 Azumah, John 100 Baëta, C. G. 122 Beal, Timothy 3, 114, 186 Bediako, Kwame 119 – 120, 124, 126, 136, 164 – 165, 172 Blumenthal, Christian 71 Boring, M. E. 22 Bormann, Lukas 23, 56 Bovon, François 59, 72, 154 Breed, Brennan 7 – 9 Capitein, Jacobus Elisa Johannes 172 Clark, David 8, 10

14, 112,

Doering, Lutz 52 Dube, Musa 154 – 155 Ekem, John 147, 149 – 151, 171, 173 – 175, 178, 186 – 187, 195 – 196, 229, 231 – 132 Evans, C. A. 49 Evans, Robert 6 Feldmeier, Reinhard 44, 55 – 57. Ferrari, Franco 54 Frey, Jörg 25 – 26, 46 – 47, 52 Gadamer, Hans Georg 3 Gifford, Paul 118, 126 – 127, 132, 134 Goulder, Michael 40 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110730579-011

Grimm, Werner 49 Gunda, Masiiwa 6 Gyekye, Kwame 101 – 103, 180, 182 Hemer, Colins 79 Heward-Mills, Dag 209, 229 Instone‐Brewer, David

46, 66

Jauss, Hans Robert 4 Jeremias, Joachim 18, 36, 39, 46, 83, 87 Kahl, Werner 99, 114, 124, 130, 172 Kistemaker, Simon 17 Klein, Hans 88 Knight, Mark 5, 7 Konradt, Matthias 22, 29 Kuhn, Karl Georg 48 Kuwornu-Adjaottor, Jonathan Edward Tetteh 188 – 189, 196 Landefeld, Katrin Maria 45 Laryea, Philip 162, 169 – 171 Lochman, Jan Milič 77 Lohfink, Gerhard 15 Lohmeyer, Ernst 75 – 76, 79, 81, 84, 86, 89, 92 Lohse, Eduard 39, 45, 47, 61, 67, 81, 84, 86, 89 Luz, Ulrich 1, 6, 20, 22, 24, 59, 88 – 89, 233 Martin, Michael Wade 29 Mbillah, John 100 Metzger, Bruce M. 17, 58 Mintah, Joyce Afia Adubea 189, 230 Morgenthaler, Robert 27, 43, 54, 78 Nadar, Sarojini 153 Nesselrath, Heinz-Günter Neumann, J. N. 43 Neumann, Nils 23

53

252

Index of Names

Ngong, David T. 145 – 146 Nukunya, G. K. 102, 104

Smith, Daniel A. 25 Spieckermann, Hermann

Ocloo, Christian 216 – 218 Oduyoye, Mercy Amba 153 Omenyo, Cephas 109, 115, 119, 122 – 123, 125, 128, 137 Onyinah, Opoku 204, 206 Orobator, Agbonkhianmeghe E. 142

ter Haar, Gerrie 117, 126 Tette, Edem 228

Parsons, Robert T. 115 Philonenko, Marc 47, 49, 81 Phiri, Isabel Apawo 153 Pobee, John 104, 156, 158, 161 – 163 Quarshie, B. Y.

147, 149

Sawyer, John F. A. 5 Schattner-Rieser, Ursula Schnelle, Udo 15

Ukpong, Justin

55 – 56

11, 140 – 143

van Tilborg, S 43 von der Osten-Sacken

84

Wehnert, Jürgen 34 Wengst, Klaus 19 Wenham, David 24, 79 West, Gerald 140, 142 – 143 Westermann, Claus 67 Wilk, Florian 25, 36, 41, 55, 70 Wolter, Michael 78

41, 47, 49, 81, 93 Zumstein, Jean

91