ἐπιούσιος,
ἐπιούσιον, a word found only in
Matthew 6:11 and
Luke 11:3, in the phrase
ἄρτος ἐπιούσιος ([Peshitta] Syriac
oNQNSd 4MXL []
the bread of our necessity, i. e.
necessary for us (but the Curetonian (earlier) Syriac reads
)NYM) []
continual; cf.
Lightfoot as below, I. 3, p. 214ff; Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers, p. 139f); Itala (Old Latin)
panisquotidianus).
Origen testifies (de orat. 27) that the word was not in use in ordinary speech, and accordingly seems to have been coined by the Evangelists themselves. Many commentators, as Beza, Kuinoel, Tholuck, Ewald, Bleek,
Keim,
Cremer, following
Origen,
Jerome (who in Matt. only translates by the barbarous phrase
panissupersubstantialis),
Theophylact,
Euthymius Zigabenus, explain the word by
bread for sustenance, which serves to sustain life, deriving the word from
οὐσία, after the analogy of
ἐξουσιος,
ἐνουσιος. But
οὐσία very rarely, and only in philosophic language, is equivalent to
ὕπαρξις, as in
Plato, Theact., p. 185 c. (app. to
τό μή εἶναι),
Aristotle, de part. anim. i. 1 (
ἡ γάρ γένεσις ἕνεκα τῆς οὐσίας ἐστιν,
ἀλλ' οὐχ ἡ οὐσία ἕνεκα τῆς γενέσεως; for other examples see Bonitz's Index to
Aristotle, p. 544), and generally denotes either
essence, real nature, or substance, property, resources. On this account Leo Meyer (in Kuhn, Zeitschr. f. vergleich. Sprachkunde, vii., pp. 401-430), Kamphausen (Gebet des Herrn, pp. 86-102), with whom
Keim (ii. 278f. (English translation, iii. 340)), Weiss (Matthew, the passage cited), Delitzsch (Zeitschr. f. d. luth. Theol. 1876, p. 402), agree, prefer to derive the word from
ἐπειναι (and in particular from the participle
ἐπων,
ἐπουσιος for
ἐποντιος, see below)
to be present, and to understand it bread
which is ready at hand or suffices, so that Christ is conjectured to have said in Chaldean
דְּחֻקָּנָא לַחְמָא (cf.
חֻקִּי לֶחֶם my allowance of bread,
Proverbs 30:8) or something of the sort. But this opinion, like the preceding, encounters the great objection (to mention no other) that, although the iota
ἰ in
ἐπί is retained before a vowel in certain words (as
ἐπίορκος,
ἐπιορκέω,
ἐπιόσσομαι, etc. (cf.
Lightfoot, as below, I. § 1)), yet in
ἐπειναι and words derived from it,
ἐπουσια,
ἐπουσιωδης, it is always elided. Therefore much more correctly do Grotius, Scaliger,
Wetstein, Fischer (De vitiis lexamples etc., p. 306ff), Valckenaer, Fritzsche (on Matthew, p. 267ff),
Winer (97 (92)), Bretschneider, Wahl, Meyer (
Lightfoot (Revision etc., Appendix)) and others, comparing the words
ἑκούσιος,
ἐθελούσιος,
γερούσιος (from
ἑκών,
ἐθελων,
γέρων, for
ἑκοντιος,
ἐθελοντιος,
γεροντιος, cf. Kühner, 1: § 63, 3 and § 334, 1 Anm. 2), conjecture that the adjective
ἐπιούσιος is formed from
ἐπιών,
ἐπιοῦσα, with reference to the familiar expression
ἡ ἐπιοῦσα (see
ἄπειμι), and
ἄρτος ἐπιούσιος is equivalent to
ἄρτος τῆς ἐπιουσης ἡμέρας,
food for (i. e.
necessary or
sufficient for)
the morrow. Thus,
ἐπιούσιον, and
σήμερον, admirably answer to each other, and that state of mind is portrayed which, piously contented with
food sufficing from one day to the next, in praying to God for sustenance does not go beyond the absolute necessity of the nearest future. This explanation is also recommended by the fact that in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, as
Jerome testifies, the word
ἐπιούσιος was represented by the Aramaic
מְחַר,
quod dicitur crastinus; hence, it would seem that Christ himself used the Chaldaic expression
לִמְחַר דִי לַחְמָא. Nor is the prayer, so understood, at variance with the mind of Christ as expressed in
Matthew 6:34, but on the contrary harmonizes with it finely; for his hearers are bidden to ask of God, in order that they may themselves be relieved of anxiety for the morrow. (See
Lightfoot, as above, pp. 195-234; McClellan, The New Testament, etc., pp. 632-647; Tholuck, Bergpredigt, Matthew, the passage cited, for earlier references.)