4 ms·

Maybe it's not so difficult to translate. Fr Lawrence Farley [1] notes that 1) the word was used in other historical writings than the Bible and 2) that the clo

Maybe it's not so difficult to translate. Fr Lawrence Farley [1] notes that 1) the word was used in other historical writings than the Bible and 2) that the closely related word `epiouse' is used in Acts 16:11 which reads "We set sail from Troas and took a straight course to Samothrace, the next day, to Neapolis." As with many things relating to the Bible or Christianity, it can be helpful to search for what the Orthodox church says about it. [1]: https://www.oca.org/reflections/fr.-lawrence-farley/the-lords-prayer-give-us-this-day-our-daily-bread https://www.oca.org/reflections/fr.-lawrence-farley/the-lord...

CameronNemo 5y ago
Generally, wouldn't a religious organization be a biased source? They use religious texts to derive power, establish a narrative, and influence people's actions.
- ezekiel68 5y ago
  You have an interesting point. However, if a biased, power-hungry organization says that the temperature outside at a certain time & location is 27° C and that really is the temperature there, the bias and ambition are less relevant.
- mlang23 5y ago
  Indeed. Its a clear case of trusting the cat to keep the cream. But most poeple dont seem to notice, which is indicative for how strong the illusions the churches have created are.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gmoot 5y ago
  I reject this blanket characterization of religious organizations, but anyway the Eastern / Greek Orthodox Church is interesting here because it descends directly from the original Greek speaking Christians in the Eastern Roman empire when the Bible was written. It's like asking a Jew about translating the Torah - it's about historical continuity and subject matter expertise.
  - CameronNemo 5y ago
    like asking a Jew about translating the Torah But it is not. A single person of Jewish faith has no conflict of interest. A better example would be a centralized rabbinic authority, which hasn't existed since the fall of ancient Israel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin
- ARandomerDude 5y ago
  Good thing atheists don't have any biases.
  - CameronNemo 5y ago
    You are putting words in my mouth. I specifically called out religious organizations, not religious individuals. I would have just as much doubt in the analysis of an atheistic organization. Secular =/= atheistic.
    - srcreigh 5y ago
      Are you aware that the Orthodox church doesn't have a single leader? It is several organizations which co-exist as one united body. (More or less. There are some recent schisms which are probably temporary. There aren't currently any partitions, ie Constantinople and Moscow are still united through Antioch, etc.) Technically Christ leads the church, but even among God there are 3 of them who co-exist.
- throw0101a 5y ago
  The Gospels were written in the first century AD, when the (Catholic) Church was not in any way a powerful organization. Christianity didn't because the official religion until many centuries later: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan And just because someone is biased, does not make them wrong: * https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic * https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
  - CameronNemo 5y ago
    This has nothing to do with anything I said.
- aiilns 5y ago
  In this case no. Even if we accept your argument - which really can only be partly true - I don't understand how the interpretation of epiousios could change. How would they derive power, establish a narrative and influence people's actions? On big issues that may be something to keep in mind, in an issue such as this, which a word could be taken to mean either "daily bread", "supersubstantial bread" or anything in between, I don't really see why they'd try to spin it any way other the one they honestly understood it as.
  - CameronNemo 5y ago
    I began my comment with the word "generally" for a reason. The person I replied to gave broad advice to consult the Eastern Orthodox church for religious interpretation. I was responding to that broad recommendation, not this specific case.
- bobthechef 5y ago
  No. This text belongs to a religious tradition. Texts are not free-floating bits of meaning somehow unrelated to the traditions in which they were written. So reading text in light of tradition is arguably the best way to interpret text.
imarg 5y ago
The wikipedia article mentions your 1st point (that it was used elsewhere) but then continues to say that when the original text was reexamined it was found that it was a different word. >However, after the papyrus containing the shopping list, missing for many years, was rediscovered at the Yale Beinecke Library in 1998,[21] a re-examination found "elaiou" (oil), not "epiousios." (The original transcriber, A. H. Sayce, was apparently known to be a poor transcriber.)
- fourtrees 5y ago
  Now that's interesting. I hadn't heard that the shopping list reference had been called into question. That deepens the mystery quite a bit.

CameronNemo 5y ago

Generally, wouldn't a religious organization be a biased source? They use religious texts to derive power, establish a narrative, and influence people's actions.

ezekiel68 5y ago
You have an interesting point. However, if a biased, power-hungry organization says that the temperature outside at a certain time & location is 27° C and that really is the temperature there, the bias and ambition are less relevant.
mlang23 5y ago
Indeed. Its a clear case of trusting the cat to keep the cream. But most poeple dont seem to notice, which is indicative for how strong the illusions the churches have created are.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
gmoot 5y ago
I reject this blanket characterization of religious organizations, but anyway the Eastern / Greek Orthodox Church is interesting here because it descends directly from the original Greek speaking Christians in the Eastern Roman empire when the Bible was written. It's like asking a Jew about translating the Torah - it's about historical continuity and subject matter expertise.
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  like asking a Jew about translating the Torah But it is not. A single person of Jewish faith has no conflict of interest. A better example would be a centralized rabbinic authority, which hasn't existed since the fall of ancient Israel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin
ARandomerDude 5y ago
Good thing atheists don't have any biases.
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  You are putting words in my mouth. I specifically called out religious organizations, not religious individuals. I would have just as much doubt in the analysis of an atheistic organization. Secular =/= atheistic.
  - srcreigh 5y ago
    Are you aware that the Orthodox church doesn't have a single leader? It is several organizations which co-exist as one united body. (More or less. There are some recent schisms which are probably temporary. There aren't currently any partitions, ie Constantinople and Moscow are still united through Antioch, etc.) Technically Christ leads the church, but even among God there are 3 of them who co-exist.
throw0101a 5y ago
The Gospels were written in the first century AD, when the (Catholic) Church was not in any way a powerful organization. Christianity didn't because the official religion until many centuries later: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Milan And just because someone is biased, does not make them wrong: * https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic * https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  This has nothing to do with anything I said.
aiilns 5y ago
In this case no. Even if we accept your argument - which really can only be partly true - I don't understand how the interpretation of epiousios could change. How would they derive power, establish a narrative and influence people's actions? On big issues that may be something to keep in mind, in an issue such as this, which a word could be taken to mean either "daily bread", "supersubstantial bread" or anything in between, I don't really see why they'd try to spin it any way other the one they honestly understood it as.
- CameronNemo 5y ago
  I began my comment with the word "generally" for a reason. The person I replied to gave broad advice to consult the Eastern Orthodox church for religious interpretation. I was responding to that broad recommendation, not this specific case.
bobthechef 5y ago
No. This text belongs to a religious tradition. Texts are not free-floating bits of meaning somehow unrelated to the traditions in which they were written. So reading text in light of tradition is arguably the best way to interpret text.

imarg 5y ago

The wikipedia article mentions your 1st point (that it was used elsewhere) but then continues to say that when the original text was reexamined it was found that it was a different word. >However, after the papyrus containing the shopping list, missing for many years, was rediscovered at the Yale Beinecke Library in 1998,[21] a re-examination found "elaiou" (oil), not "epiousios." (The original transcriber, A. H. Sayce, was apparently known to be a poor transcriber.)

fourtrees 5y ago
Now that's interesting. I hadn't heard that the shopping list reference had been called into question. That deepens the mystery quite a bit.