Hacker News Reader

Comment by throw0101a | Hacker News Reader

The article mentions the Old Testament, but there's also a hapax in the New Testament: the "daily" bread in the Lor'd Prayer ('Our Father'):

> Epiousios (ἐπιούσιος) is a Greek adjective of controversial meaning whose only recorded appearance is in the Lord's Prayer. Although it is traditionally translated as "daily" in the phrase τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον ("our epiousios bread"), most modern scholars reject that interpretation.

[…]

> The modern Catholic Catechism holds that there are several ways of understanding epiousios, including the traditional 'daily', but most literally as 'supersubstantial' or 'superessential', based on its morphological components.[14] […]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiousios

View on HN

Not the only one in the New Testament, but definitely one of the most juicy. Even Wikipedia calling 'daily' the 'traditional' translation is dubious: 'daily' comes from a particular Latin translation, not the earliest, nor the most common ancient one, nor the most famous.

A more denomination/sectarianism musing:

https://irrco.wordpress.com/2010/06/13/give-us-this-day-our-...

> Not the only one in the New Testament

What are some others?

There are more than 1500 NT hapax, and epiousios (and others) aren't exactly hapax (they appear twice ['dis legomena'], or more, though often in bits arguably copied from one source). A minority are names (e.g. Epicurean only in Acts 17:18), most are words that appear in non-NT texts (technically hapax, but often meh, obviously), most others (like 'epiousios') are compound word that are easy to understand (e.g. if you read an English writer saying 'she metathought about the problem' it wouldn't mystify you), but that still leaves plenty of oddities.

But the juicy ones have theological significance. If more significant, even simply compound words can generate debate, even words known outside the NT ('What did they mean in this context?'). Off the top of my head: Theopneustos (a hapax) from 2 Tim 3:16 is the forceful example (forceful for evangelicals at least). Authenteo in 1 Tim 2:12 is important in feminist theology. Arsenokoitai in 1 Cor 6:9 is a crucial question in LGBT theology (a dis legomenon, strictly, [oh hai 1 Tim, again], though I guess this post is allowing those ;)

Tanakh hapax are more difficult because we don't have masses of other/earlier Hebrew and Hebrew is less often based on compound morphemes. So 'OT' hapax are more widely known, imho.

Super interesting, especially considering that some people believe the referred to "bread" could have been some sort of hallucinogenic concoction, in particular mushrooms.

And, if that was the case, it would make a lot more sense that you wouldn't call it (or want it) daily, but instead you would describe it as "supersubstantial" or "superessential".

A potential antithesis to both 'daily' and 'hallucinogenic':

In french, épi is the ear: the topmost, superior, part of a grain plant. (leading to mathematical puns involving fields and sheaves, etc.)

If the FR ag usage reflects GRC ag usage, it would suggest the reading:

    Give us this day our grain-substance bread.

(no paleo bread for true believers?)

Unsubstantiated, yes, but it's the rentrée, so I probably won't be cultivating this topic before the weekend.

Edit: As counterevidence, modern greek botanists divide a cereal plant into blastos, phylla, stakhu and rhizos. Do farmers also use these terms in the field?

A different theory: gruel was usual, bread is a treat?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com