Luke 11:13

πονηροὶ ὑπάρχοντες. Whose whole condition is evil. The verb is stronger than if ὄντες had been used, but Bengel presses the word too much when he calls it “illustre testimonium de peccato originali.”

οἴδατε. It is the tendency of Hellenistic Greek as of all later forms of language to substitute regular for irregular forms; but οἴδαμεν, οἴδατε, and even οἴδασι, are found in Aristophanes, Xenophon, &c. See Veitch, Greek Verbs, p. 189.

ὁ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ. Your Father in heaven will give you from heaven. Comp. ἀποτάξασθαι τοῖς εἰς τὸν οἶκόν μου Luke 9:61. For other instances of this attraction by constructio praegnans see Colossians 4:16 τὴν ἐκ Λαοδικείας ἐπιστολήν, Winer p. 784.

δώσει πνεῦμα ἅγιον. St Matthew has the much more general expression δόματα� (Luke 7:11). The Good Father will give to His children neither what is deadly, nor what is unfit for food, but the best of all gifts, Himself. When, in the legend, the Vision said to St Thomas Aquinas “Bene scripsisti de me, Thoma; qualem mercedem tibi dabo?”—the noble answer was “non aliam nisi Te, Domine.”

EXCURSUS IV

ON THE MEANING OF ΕΠΙΟΥΣΙΟΝ IN Luke 11:3

After the very learned and elaborate examination to which the word has been subjected by Bishop Lightfoot, On Revision 195–234, and Dr McClellan, New Testament 632–647, it will be sufficient here to touch on their conclusions.

This word was so rare that even learned Greek Fathers like Origen considered that it had been invented by the Evangelists and were uncertain as to its meaning. It is even still a dispute whether it has a temporal or a qualitative meaning, i.e. whether it means

i. bread for the day, in one of the subordinate senses of α. continual or β. future:—or

ii. for our subsistence, whether α. physical, or β. spiritual:—or again (giving to ἐπὶ the sense of ‘upon,’ i.e. ‘in addition to’) whether it meant

iii. beyond other substances, implying either α. ‘supersubstantial,’ i.e. preeminent, or β. consubstantial.

The meanings suggested under iii. may be at once dismissed as the artificial ‘afterthoughts of theology.’
The decision depends partly on the etymology. It has been thought that the word may be derived from ἐπὶ and ἰέναι, or from ἐπὶ and οὐσία.

It seems however an insuperable objection to the latter etymology that the word is ἐπιούσιος not ἐπούσιος; and with the etymology fall the meanings suggested under ii., i.e. bread for our physical, or spiritual, subsistence.

If then the word be derived from ἐπὶ and ἰέναι it comes either from ὁ ἐπιὼν χρόνος or ἡ ἐπιοῦσα ἡμέρα. In either case it would mean ‘bread for the coming day,’ i.e. for to-morrow, or for to-day; and Bishop Lightfoot brings some evidence to shew that this was the sense accepted by the Church till the more mystical sense was supported by Origen. He sums up his essay by the words “Thus the familiar rendering ‘daily’ which has prevailed uninterruptedly in the Western Church from the beginning is a fairly adequate representation of the original; nor indeed does the English language furnish any one word which would answer the purpose so well” (p. 234). On the other hand Dr McClellan, as the result of another exhaustive criticism, decides on the meaning “proper to the future world,” and would render it “needful,” an interpretation which he argues that “etymology, original tradition, sense and context unite in establishing” (p. 646). He would therefore take it in the sense of “Give us day by day our bread of Life Eternal.”

May we not however suppose that our Lord mentally referred to Proverbs 30:8, “Feed me with food convenient for me,” LXX[431] σύνταξον δέ μοι τὰ δέοντα καὶ τὰ αὐτάρκη? If so the simpler and more obvious meaning is to be preferred.

[431] LXX. Septuagint.

But I may observe in conclusion that practically the difference is nothing: for—in uttering the prayer—whichever sense the Christian may attach to the adjective he will certainly include the spiritual sense in using the word “bread” (John 6:51).