The passage
      v1. The disciples ask Jesus for a form of prayer that might be uniquely theirs.
      v2-4. The prayer, taught by Jesus, is liturgical in form and typically commences with an invocation, an address to God. In the Lord's prayer, God is addressed as "Father"; this is a very intimate address, a sign of the disciples' status before God. Then follows a list of requests that comply with the will of God:
        i] "May your name be honoured", Phillips. May God be recognized for whom he is.
        ii] "May your reign begin", Moffatt. Referring to the glorious coming of the kingdom in the last day, but also its present realization in the life of believers; the kingdom is a "now" / "not yet" reality.
        iii] "May we receive "each day" (day by day) all that is necessary to realize the reign of God." Here, Jesus is referring to the promised work of the Spirit in the life of a believer - "gifts" and "fruit". The word "bread" is used to image the "manna" once supplied for the wilderness wanderings of the people of Israel. God gives his people what they need for service on the "way".
        iv] Forgive us our failings, past, present and future. "Forgive us when we fail to serve you faithfully, for even we can forgive, albeit imperfectly." We must always remember that our forgiving is not the ground of God's forgiving, rather, the fact that we can forgive a little reminds us that God can forgive much.
        v] "Let us not be overwhelmed by Satan's destructive evil, both now and at the great tribulation (Armageddon)." We will always be tempted and will often fall. Jesus is not speaking about temptations, but a test/trial that has the power to destroy our faith. "Let us not be done-in at a time of testing."
      v5-8. The Parable of the Midnight Friend draws out a lesson from the circumstances surrounding a neighborly request. "Can any one of you imagine the situation where an old acquaintance arrives on your doorstep at midnight, after a long journey, and you have no food in the house to give him a meal, so you go off to a friend's home and ask for some food, but all he does is tells you to get lost and you end up going home empty handed? Of course not; a friend will give you what you need. Even if he doesn't come good because he's a friend, at least he'll come good so his neighbors don't think the worst of him."
      v9-10. The first saying draws out the implication of the parable. If a reluctant friend will give us what we ask, imagine what God will do. God unhesitatingly meets his obligations when asked; he is always found by those who seek him and will immediately open himself up to those who approach him.
      v11-13. The second saying supports the first in that it is a "how much more" lesson. If we know how to give "good gifts" to our children, "how much more" will God give good gifts to his children. The problem lies in understanding what are the "good gifts"? Luke tells us that the good gift is the "Holy Spirit." Matthew just leaves it as "good things." The gift of the Holy Spirit to the believer does not just entail the gift of the personal presence of the Spirit of Christ in the life of a believer, but all the promised blessings that flow from our union with God through the Spirit. The "good gifts" are the promised blessings of the kingdom, not the presumed needs of believers.

A little prayer will do it
      In a BBC production called "Signs and Wonders", the liberal Anglican vicar is restored in his faith through answered prayer. He believes that his prayers have secured the rescue of some trapped coal-miners. At the Thanksgiving service, one of the miners walks out of the church. His remark strikes at the heart of prayer. If God got the trapped miners out of the mine, who put them there in the first place?
      The issue of prayer is made complex by pious assumptions. Prayer is talking to God; it can involve many elements such as thanksgiving, praise, confession..... The only area of difficulty concerns what we call "intercessions" and "supplications." Intercessions are prayer-requests for others, and supplications are prayer-requests for ourselves (lit. to humbly beg).
      When the disciples ask Jesus to teach them to pray, he gives them a list of proper requests. We call this list the Lord's Prayer. Jesus sets out to underline the fact that God gives us what he promises. We don't have to bash at God's door to receive his promised blessings; he is the perfect loving Father who gives his very person to us, along with all the inherent blessings that are ours in him.
      The Bible tells us that our prayers should be "according to the will of God." That is, we should ask of God those "good gifts" he has promised to give us. The Lord's Prayer is a list of those "good gifts", gifts we may ask of God in the sure knowledge that they are ours in the asking. As for the rest of our "needs", we can certainly speak to Jesus about them, but we should not expect God to act outside his revealed will.

v2
      Note the elements in the Lord's Prayer: the invocation, "Father"; two petitions concerning God's majesty and his kingdom, v2; three petitions for our "bread", v3, forgiveness and "temptation", v4. The form is liturgical, that is, a form of words to be repeated [from memory] in corporate and private worship (adoration). This fact should serve to check those believers who argue that liturgy is less than spiritual, since it is a form authorized by Christ. It is more than probable that the petitions consist of the "good things" God intends to give his children and since they are of His will, they may be requested in the sure knowledge that they will be given.
      eipen de autoiV "He said to them" - In answer to the disciples' question.
      oJtan + subj. "when [you pray]" - Forming an indefinite temporal clause, probably better, "whenever you pray", Williams. The person is plural indicating that the prayer is corporate rather than personal.
      Pater (pathr) voc. "Father" - Variant "Our Father in heaven" is obviously taken from Matthew's version, which form of words is usually regarded as original, although debates over the original words of Jesus are fruitless. An affectionate term, so "Daddy", although an adult would not use the word in this childish sense. Such an intimate address to Yahweh is a revolutionary revelation, although some argue that such an address was known in Second Temple Palestinian Judaism. There is also some Old Testament precedents, Ps.89:26, Jer. 3:4, 19. Although Jesus taught his disciples to address God as "our Father", he never included himself in the "our", since his relationship to the Father is unique. For Jesus it is "my Father."
      aJgiasqhtw (aJiazw) aor. pas. imp. "hallowed be" - may [your name] be hallowed, let be held in reverence, glorified, sanctified. The aorist indicates an eschatological honouring of God when every knee will bow before him, rather than a daily ongoing recognition of his person (a process which would require a present tense). The passive voice leaves some doubt as to the agent, either of humans/heavenly host having declared, treated, acknowledged God as holy, "venerated", Plummer, or of God himself, cf Ez.36:23, "I will sanctify my great name", in which case the sense of the petition is "reveal your glory", Nolland.
      to onoma (a atoV) "[your] name" - The "name" being the person of, the whole self, being of; "you as you have revealed yourself", TH.
      hJ basileia (a) "[you] kingdom" - Note variant, "thy holy Spirit come on us and purify us", rejected by most, but very Lukan. Most commentators understand the kingdom of God in the sense of "God's rule of righteousness and love", Caird, ie. the term is used dynamically of the act of ruling. Yet, it seems more likely that the phrase refers to the eschatological reign/rule of God through Christ, now inaugurated and yet to be consummated, "the coming reign of God", Tannehill, or even, "the actual consummation of the Messianic kingdom", Leaney. The term "kingdom of God" is used by Luke 31 times, with "kingdom" 6 times. So, given Old Testament usage, the domain over which God reigns is probably included, thus including membership, obligations, blessings ...., all the trappings of a kingdom. Plummer suggests "dominion", in the sense of authority and territory; "begin your eschatological rule", Nolland.
      elqetw (ercomai) aor. imp. "come" - let come [the kingdom of you]. Possibly "let they kingdom be inaugurated", Schonfield, although the kingdom, in the sense of God's eschatological reign, is already inaugurated and therefore the sense is more likely "be realized", even "consummated."

v3
      In the Gk., note the interesting position of the object, "bread", in front of the imperative, "give". As noted above, the petitions in the Lord's prayer most likely rest on God's promised blessings to his children. Francis certainly believed that our daily provision is promised by God, a promise realized by faith, but surely this view does not properly address the intent of Jesus' words in 12:22-34. I take it that survival provisions are not promised to believers, who, with all humanity, must face the vagaries of life in a world affected by sin. In fact, there is abundant evidence that the necessities of life have been denied many believers over the years. What then is the promised "bread"?
      didou (didwmi) pres. imp. "give [us]" - The present tense is durative, urging activity as an ongoing process, so "continually give us."
      to kaq hJmeran "each day" - Adverbial phrase = "day by day."
      ton epiousion adj. "daily [bread]" - for the day. Adjective used as a substantive. For the sample sermon the suggested sense is that the petition is for the daily provision of resources necessary for a faithful ministry to Christ; "bread" and "daily" imaging the provision of Manna for the people of Israel in their journey to the promised land. For the NT. saint the provision is not physical "bread", but spiritual "bread", eg. the gifts of the Spirit. Of course, such "bead" is promised. Other possible interpretations have been suggested and they tend to be based on the etymology of "daily", a word which remains somewhat of a mystery: i] "Necessary" bread. Here the argument rests on the sense of the prefix epi with ousia = super-substantial, so "essential" for survival. Favored by Fitzmyer. ii] "Basic" bread. Here the argument rests on the word being the feminine participle of einai, the verb to-be. So, it is bread for the present day. iii] "Tomorrow's" bread. Here the argument rests on the word being the participle of the verb ienai, "to come, draw near." This view is favored by Jeremias who argued that the bread is the eschatological bread of the coming messianic banquet. This option is certainly far superior to the first two, although why would we ask for tomorrow's bread to be given us "each day"?

v4
      afeV (afihmi) aor. imp. "forgive [us our sins]" - forgive, remit. Again, the aorist imperative properly encapsulates the whole of the action and therefore leans toward an eschatological forgiveness at the final judgment, so Grundmann, etc. For the daily forgiveness of sins a perfective tense (present, imperfect) would have been used, none-the-less, many commentators argue for a "regular cleansing from sin", Stein. This position my find support in the fact that there is no evidence for the use of the present imperative, so Nolland.
      kai gar "for [we] also" - for even/indeed. Expressing cause or reason, as opposed to Matthew's "even as", an expression which promotes the idea that God's forgiveness is conditional. Although commonly argued, it is unlikely that God's forgiveness of us is dependent on our willingness to forgive others. Note Bock, "the petitioner is to ask for forgiveness, not because it is deserved, but because the petitioner is forgiving to others" .... Ouch, I've just been ruled out of the kingdom!!! Our request for God's forgiveness is based on his promise to forgive, not our ability to forgive; our confidence in asking is "because" even sinful humanity has the capacity to forgive. If we can forgive (although imperfectly), imagine what God can do! "Forgive us our sins, for even we too forgive."
      autoi "we" - ourselves. "We ourselves", TH.
      afiomen (afihmi) pres. "forgive" - The present tense is durative, so "practice forgiveness", Nolland.
      ofeilonti (ofeilw) pres. part. "who sins [against us]" - [all] being indebted [to us]. Not literal debts, but rather, the word "debt" and "sin" were interchangeable for Second Temple Jews, although this was not so in classical Greek. This is why Luke probably replaces Matthew's "debts" with "sins" in "forgive us our sins", so Fitzmyer, although "other forms of indebtedness" may be intended as well, so Nolland.
      mh eisenegkhV (eisferw) aor. subj. "lead us not" - do not lead, drive, bring. A prohibitive subjunctive. As above, the aorist, here with the subjunctive, forming a prohibition that covers, not the commencement of the action, "do not begin to", but rather the whole of the action. Rather than "do not cause", possibly "do not permit, allow", in the sense of "do not let us be overcome by ...."
      peirasmon (oV) "temptation" - temptation, test. Possibly the eschatological tribulation / test / trial when even the faithful will fall away, although the word is missing the article. This probably means that any damning test / trial is intended, so Moule. Luce suggests Gethsemane was such a test for Jesus and this type of test could easily overwhelm us, so "pray that you not enter into testing", 22:40. Not any temptation, so Creed, given that we will always face temptation and often succumb (we are not promised freedom from temptation, or failure), but a test / trial which has the power to drive us into apostasy. The request is not that we be spared such tests, since such tests are promised, but rather that we not succumb to them. Such protection is promised and thus we may ask in the sure knowledge that the Shepherd will keep his sheep safe.

v5
      The parable of the midnight guest is often treated as if teaching persistence in prayer. This seems unlikely. Given the thrust of the teaching sayings following the parable, it seems more likely to be a "how much more" lesson. If a midnight guest can get what he wants from a reluctant friend, imagine what we can get from a gracious God. None-the-less, it is possible that the parable also teaches perseverance in prayer, not in the sense of persistence in asking, but in a willingness to ask, irrespective of the circumstances.
      exei (ecw) fut. "has" - [who among you] will have [a friend]. A deliberative future setting up a rhetorical question which takes the form of the protasis of a conditional clause with v8 serving as the apodosis. A negative answer is implied, see v8. "Can anyone one of you imagine that you have a friend ....", Marshall.
      tiV "one [of you]" - who. Interrogative pronoun referring to the certain person who approaches a friend for a loan of bread, so NIV etc. although the opposite is possible, "suppose one of you has a friend who comes to him in the middle of the night", REB.
      mesonukiou (on) gen. "at midnight" - Genitive of time.
      eiph/ (eipon) aor. subj. "says" - Deliberative real subjunctive setting up a question where an answer is expected. The answer coming in v7.
      crhson (kicrhmi) aor. imp. "lend" - As in lend something, not lend for the payment of interest, so "allow me to have the use of."

v6
      paraqhsw (paratiqhmi) fut. "[I have nothing] to set before" - [what] I will set before. Relative clause where the future expects "a sort of result", Marshall. "A friend of mine has dropped in and I don't have a thing for him to eat", CEV.

v7
      kakeinoV "then the one [inside]" - and that one. Derogatory, or at least sarcastic.
      apokriqeiV (apokrinomai) aor. pas. part. "answers" - [may say] having answered. The participle is attendant circumstance identifying an action that accompanies the main verb "may say", pleonastic (redundant).
      mh moi kopouV parece "don't bother me" - do not cause me trouble. The present tense is durative expressing ongoing trouble. Probably the image is of a small house where getting up to open the door will wake the whole household. "Don't bother me with your troubles", Phillips.
      ou dunamai "I can't [get up]" - I am not able. Possibly stronger; "I won't get up", Manson.
      anastaV (anisthmi) aor. part. "get up" - having arisen. The participle is complementary, completing the thought of the main verb "I am [not] able" = "I am not able to get up". Obviously "not willing", or better, as above, "won't".

v8
      We finally come to the answer of the rhetorical question asked in v5. Of course, in verse five the question was formed in the second person plural, but this seems to have been lost in the journey and is further disturbed by the addition of "I tell you" (this phrase is often used to indicate an application of, or conclusion to, an argument and so can be left untranslated). Nolland suggests we can pick up on the origin of the rhetorical question in v5 with "you are quite right to think ....."
      ei + ind. "though" - if. Forming the protasis of a conditional sentence, 1st class, where the condition stated in the protasis is viewed as a reality. The conditional sentence is best translated as "even if .... certainly", rather than "although ...... at least", so Nolland. Even if a situation did develop where a friend was unwilling to be inconvenienced, which is unlikely, he certainly would inevitably act on the request so as not to be shamed in the sight of his neighbors.
      anastaV (anisthmi) aor. pas. "[he will not] get up and [give]" - having arisen. The participle is probably attributive expressing action accompanying the main verb "will not give".
      dia + acc. "[yet] because" - because of, on account of.
      to einai "he is [his friend]" - Articular infinitive of the verb to-be governed by the preposition "because", forming a clause expressing the reason for the action of the main verb "will not give."
      thn anaideian (a) "boldness" - shamelessness, impudence. The meaning of this word, a hapax legomenon (once only use in the NT.), is disputed. It is often translated as "persistence", namely the persistence of the friend who beats upon door: "boldness", Stein; "shamelessness", in the sense of making such a demand at midnight, Johnson; "shameless boldness", Bock; "unblushing persistence", Leaney; "his importunity in begging and begging at this late hour of the night", Fitzmyer. Yet, it is more likely that the word takes a positive sense, "sense of shame", so "honor", "self-respect", and is used to describe the motivation of the friend in bed. The friend may not act as a friend, but out of "honor" he will act, or at least "so as not to lose face", Marshall. See Nolland, 626. There is a problem with grammar in that autoV "his", of "his shame", seems to align with "his friend", which refers to the man knocking on the door, not the man asleep, although not necessarily so. The illustration does not teach that the man in bed is supposed to represent God; the parable is not an allegory, just a teaching illustration. The point is simple: if a friend will comply with a difficult request, although sometimes belatedly, imagine how much more God will do. "Even if he will not get up and give him (anything) because he is his friend, because of the prospect of him being shamed, he will get up and give him as much as he needs", Nolland.

v9
      In verses 9 & 10 we find the typical teaching saying which is often attached to a teaching/illustrative parable. The general nature of the saying has led to the view that a believer can ask anything of God and it will be given. Sometimes this view is moderated by qualifications such as "asking in faith / believing", even of being in a state of grace, forgiven, living a righteous life, etc. The context, especially v13, indicates that this is not a general promise for "anything", but specifically of a saving right relationship with God through Christ. Ask for his friendship and it is ours for eternity, seek him and we will find him, knock on his door and we will be welcomed into his presence. The saying may have a wider application, and if so, it would refer to God's "good gifts", those things promised us by God.
      kagw uJmin legw "so I say to you" - Again, serving to introduce a conclusion or application. "Here's what I'm saying", Peterson.
      aiteite (aitew) pres. imp. "ask" - The present imperative urging activity as an ongoing process, so "make it your habit", Rogers.
      doqhsetai (didwmi) fut. pas. "it will be given [to you]" - Probably a theological passive expressing God as the agent (although a dubious grammatical category).

v10
      gar "for" - Possibly restating the wisdom of v9 (parallelism), "so then doesn't this proverb say ......", although probably better as a prophetic confirmation of v9, "so therefore you should ask and you will receive", Nolland.
      lambanei (lambanw) pres. "receives" - The present tense is probably iterative, expressing repeated action.
      anoighsetai (anoigw) fut. pas. "will be opened" - will be opened, unlocked, disclosed. Variant in the present tense exists and has strong support. Again, a theological passive.

v11
      The final three verses serve to support Jesus' call to prayer in v9-10. If an earthly father willingly gives good things to his children, "how much more" will our heavenly Father give his promised good things to us. Unlike Matthew, Luke defines the good things as "the Holy Spirit."
      tina "which" - who, what, why. Interrogative pronoun.
      aithsei (aitew) fut. "asks" - Deliberative future, deliberating over a possibility. Here the possibility is made unlikely by the negative connective mh, although it is more than likely that the variant kai, "and instead of a fish will give him a snake", is original, Metzger. In fact, the kai probably reflects the original construction which was possibly a Semitic conditional sentence with the apodosis in the form of a question, "if any father among you is asked by his son for a fish, will he give him a serpent instead of a fish"? Marshall. The syntax of the sentence is difficult, an anacoluthon (Luke has lost his way a bit with the grammar). Note the double accusative construction ("fathers", "fish", acc.) with "asks", "which" and "fathers" are in apposition, and the articular form of "fathers" and "son" serving to express the possessive.

v12
      h] kai "or if" - or also. An eel looks a bit like a snake and this could be the intended fish, but a scorpion doesn't much look like an egg, although it can roll up into an egg-like shape. "Or if he asks for an egg, is he likely to give him a scorpion"? Barclay.