Skip to main content

Give Us Our Daily Bread

This is the fourth blog in the series on The Lord’s Prayer. The previous blog are Rediscovering the Power of The Lord’s Prayer, Our Father in Heaven, May Your Name Be Sanctified and May your Kingdom come Your Will Be Done. Now we will continue to the fourth line of the prayer:

Give us our daily bread.

Comments and Cultural Insights

1. In ancient Hebrew, the word for “bread” (lechem) actually signified one’s “basic food substance.”

2. To farmers lechem meant the grain that was made into bread, to shepherds it was “meat,” and to fishermen it meant “fish.”

3. People of that time period understood in a very real and tangible way that their survival depended on God sending the rains and providing good weather for the crops to grow and be harvested.

4. They understood their roles in the process – from preparing the land to getting food to the poorest members of society.

5. There little doubt that Jews around the world prayed words very similar to this every day – and still do in their prayers.8

Making the words of The Lord’s Prayer a Reality in Our Lives

1. In the gospels it says that Jesus “took the bread and blessed.” Some translations incorrectly add the word “it,” to sound as if Jesus “blessed the bread.” In the Jewish culture, people bless God for providing the food, while Christians usually “bless the food.” “Blessing God” means “thanking God” for providing the food. Saying a blessing before eating a meal has been a ritual in Judaism from before the time us Jesus until now.

2. This blessing is one of the most common Jewish blessing said before eating a meal today:

Barukh ata Adoinai Eloheinu melekh ha’olam
Blessed are You, Lord our God, Ruler of the universe,

hamotzi lehem min ha’aretz.
who brings forth bread from the earth.

3. For most of human history, eating together with family members and others was the norm. Today it is completely unknown in many homes. Simply introducing the simple ritual of family members gathering together around a table to share a meal provides families with many benefits, such as these:

A. Building Closer Relationships: Mealtimes can be the most common time children communicate with parents. Turning off the TV allows the family to connect and make memories together by asking children about their day, school, friends, goals and more. 

B. More Nutritious: Meals eaten at home tend to be healthier than meals eaten out. 

C. Develop Social Skills: By eating together as a family, children are given an opportunity to develop and improve their social and conversation skills, as well as their table manners. Talking about planning an activity like a family vacation, can allow children to become more social and improve linguistic development.

D. Develop Listening Skills: Many parents today are good at “bossing” their children, but very weak in “hearing” what their children are trying to say to them. The more confident your child becomes in sharing thoughts with you, the stronger your relationships become.

E. Stability: Eating with your children can give them a stronger sense of stability and security.1

If you found this blog informative, useful and valuable, let us know and help us share it with others.

Raise Awareness

Make others aware of this information by
& getting together with a friend or two and discussing this lesson. 

Donate it forward!

If you have never donated,
our “Helping Friends” made this blog available for you!
Become a “Helping Friend” by donating now -- Click Here for options.
By “donating it forward” information will be available to future vistors!

Let Your Amazon Purchases Help Fund this work too!
Click on the link below when you login to Amazon --
Amazon will donate a percentage of what you pay to BHC.


Popular posts from this blog

Why did they lay their coats at Saul's feet?

The witnesses, laying their coats at the feet of Saul, were the men that would cast the first stones at Stephen in Acts 7. Why did they all lay their coats at Saul’s feet? The Talmud contains a very interesting account of the act of stoning that may provide the answer.
“When the trial was over, they take him [the condemned person] out to be stoned. The place of stoning was at a distance from the court, as it is said, ‘Take out the one who has cursed.’[i] A man stands at the entrance of the court; in his hand is a signaling flag [Hebrewsudarin = sudar, ‘scarf, sweater’]. A horseman was stationed far away but within sight of him. If one [of the judges] says, ‘I have something [more] to say in his favor,’ he [the signaler] waves thesudarin, and the horseman runs and stops them [from stoning him]. Even if [the condemned person] himself says, ‘I have something to say in my favor,’ they bring him back, even four of five times, only provided that there is some substance to what he is saying.…

Madison's Warnings About Creating Political Parties

While doing some research today I came across the "Federalists No. 10" written by James Madison on Thursday, November 22, 1787. Madison warned his readers about the dangers of the formation of political parties and allowing them to become involved in government. 
When the Constitution was written in 1787, the founders thought of political parties as "factions," acting only for their own selfish interests rather than the public good. The founders saw instances in history when factions resorted to assassination and civil war if they failed to get their way. The writers of the Constitution believed that political parties would play no formal role in the new government. The Constitution made no mention of them.

Even in electing the president, the founders assumed the absence of political parties. The Constitution established an Electoral College, which called for a small number of electors—elected or appointed in the states— to meet, deliberate, and choose the best perso…

What does the word “religion” mean?

I just began reading Karen Armstrong’s book Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence (Anchor Books; New York, NY). Her introduction provides a tremendous amount of very important historical insights. Below is an excerpt from pages 4-5. I divided it into additional paragraphs and underlined portions because it is packed with so much.
For about fifty years now it has been clear in the academy that there is no universal way to define religion. In the West we see “religion” as a coherent system of obligatory beliefs, institutions, and rituals, centering on a supernatural God, whose          practice is essentially private and hermetically sealed off from all “secular” activities. But words in other languages that we translate as “religion” almost invariably refer to something larger, vaguer, and more encompassing.
The Arabic din signifies an entire way of life. The Sanskrit dharma is also “a ‘total’ concept, untranslatable, which covers law, justice, morals and social life.”