Epiousion

It is masculine, accusative, singular, agreeing in gender, number, and case with the noun it qualifies, ἄρτον, arton ("bread").

In an interlinear gloss:[7][8] ΤὸνTheἄρτονbreadἡμῶνof usτὸνtheἐπιούσιονepiousionδὸςgiveἡμῖνusσήμερονtodayΤὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερονThe bread {of us} the epiousion give us today"Give us today our epiousion bread"In the 20th century, another supposed instance appeared to come to light.

In an Egyptian papyrus dated to the 5th century CE which contains a shopping list,[9][10] a word transcribed as epiousi was reported as being next to the names of several grocery items.

This implies the probability of language interpretation (i.e., spoken Aramaic to written Greek) at the outset of recording the Gospel.

Thus, the meaning of any such word is often difficult to determine, because cross-references and comparisons with other usages are not possible, except by morphological analysis.

Usually the iota at the end of epi would be dropped in a compound whose second word starts with a vowel (compare, e. g., eponym vs epigraph).

This interpretation was supported by early writers such as Augustine, Cyril of Jerusalem, Cyprian of Carthage and John Cassian.

In the Douay-Rheims Bible English translation of the Vulgate (Matthew 6:11) reads "give us this day our supersubstantial bread".

[27] In 1979, the Nova Vulgata, also called the Neo-Vulgate, became the official Latin edition of the Bible published by the Holy See for use in the contemporary Roman rite.

The Nova Vulgata retains the same correspondence-of-meaning for epiousion in the Lord's Prayer contained in the Gospel according to Matthew[28] and Luke[29] as in the Vulgate, i.e., supersubstantialem and quotidianum.

For this reason it is fitting for the Eucharistic liturgy to be celebrated each day.In the Eastern Orthodox Church, "supersubstantial" is thought to be a more accurate translation.

Here is how Father Thomas Hopko of Saint Vladimir's Seminary in New York explains it: epiousios [...] [is] an absolutely unique word.

That the gospel writers needed to create a new word indicates to Eugene LaVerdiere, an American Catholic priest and biblical scholar of the post-Vatican II era, that they are describing something new.

[31] Supersubstantial was the dominant Latin translation of epiousion from Matthew for many centuries after Jerome, and influenced church ritual.

[32] Those rejecting this translation include some Roman Catholic Biblical scholars, such as Raymond E. Brown,[33] Jean Carmignac,[34] and Nicholas Ayo.

A native Greek speaker writing a century and half after the Gospels were composed, he did not recognize the word and thought it was an original neologism.

[40] Early supporters of this translation include Cyril of Alexandria and Peter of Laodicea by way of linking epiousion with the verb epienai, "of tomorrow.

"[41][42] According to Jewish theologian Herbert Basser, this translation was also considered (but eventually rejected) as a possibility by Jerome, who noted it as an aside in his commentary to Matthew that the Gospel of the Hebrews used ma[h]ar ("for tomorrow") in this verse.

[44][33] Referencing epiousei in Acts 7:26, the Lutheran theologian Albert Schweitzer, reintroduced this translation in modern times.

[40] Pitre also cites that an adjectival form for "tomorrow" exists in ancient Greek, αὔριον in Matthew 6:34, and could have been used instead of the one-time-use ἐπιούσιον.

[48][4] Another potential issue with a "for the future" translation is it seems to contradict Matthew 6:31, where only a few verses later Jesus tells his followers not to worry about food, that God will take care of such needs.

[5] Kenneth E. Bailey, a professor of theology and linguistics, proposed "give us today the bread that doesn't run out" as the correct translation.

In Syriac epiousion is translated as ameno, meaning lasting, perpetual, constant, trustworthy, never-ceasing, never-ending, or always.

"[50] Davies and Allison state that the verse has also been translated as "give us this day the bread that belongs to it," though they concede that this expression is little recognized by modern scholars.

For example, Codex Marianus translates it as насѫщьнъі (nasǫštĭnŭì, which appears to be a calque of epiousion using the ousia etymology with debatable semantics[51]) in Luke 11:3 but наставъшааго дьне (nastavŭšaago dĭne, 'for the coming day') in Matthew 6:11.

Sava's book agrees in the latter case, but has дьневьнъі (dĭnevĭnŭì, 'daily') in the former, while Codex Zographensis has надьневьнъі (nadĭnevĭnŭì) and настоѩшт… (nastojęšt) respectively.