Hello sir, I am a Christian convert from Turkey. I just got interested in Koine and I thank you for all your efforts here on TH-cam. May God bless you and your work!
Thank you for this video Mr. Mckerras, it was very helpful to me. I was searching for videos like this as I believed it was best when learning a language to learn from living usage of the language rather than textbook memorisation, so it was nice to see you allude to this point of view in your previous video on the Lord's Prayer. There was also the added bonus of some very interesting pieces of linguistic knowledge in this video, and I also found out that my knowledge of grammar itself is lacking if I wish to learn a new language!
Thank you for explaining the Lord's Prayer. I don't know if you make it on purpose, but the h sound (like HHero) you pronounce before words like ημάς, was used by the ancient Greeks when they were talking (it's not used today) and in general your pronounciation is fantastic! So, as much I know, in our New Testament, the Lord's Prayer is written in Ellinistiki Koine. As you probably know, there are so many ancient Greek Dialects, but I'll focus on Ellinistiki Koine. So, here's the pronunciation, which I tried to make to its best version, but isn't 100% accurate because Greek, as well as English, has it's own unique sounds. "Pater eemon, o en tis ouraniss, ayiasthito to onoma sou, eltheto e vasilia sou, yenithito to thelema sou, os en ourano kee epe tis yis, ton arton imon ton epeousion, dos (like THey) imin simeron, ke afes imin ta ofilimata imon, os ke emis afiemen tis ofiletes imon, ke mi isenegkis emas is perasmon, alla rese emas apo tou ponirou. Ameen." The translation into English is very good! I hope that I helped someone who wants to learn Greek or the Lord's Prayer itself (called from us as "Κυριακή Προσευχή Kereake Prosefhi" or as usually known as "Πάτερ Ημών Pater eemon") Have a good day!
I'm not sure how the English translation for "πονηροῦ" became "evil". In Greek, the translation for "πονηροῦ" is "cunning", "sly" and/or "sinister". Perhaps a word was needed that encompassed all the three traits? Great video. Thank you
Ross, I was brought here by somebody criticizing Pope Francis for approving a new English translation of the Lord's Prayer. Apparently, rather than translating the line as, “Lead us not into temptation,” the researchers found, the passage should read, “Abandon us not when in temptation.” I am very interested to hear your thoughts on this. I see that the Hebrew for this word can mean "Cause/allow", I can see that "Allow" may be an avenue to say that God may be "Abandoning" us into temptation.
“Do not abandon us when in temptation” is certainly a possible translation. However I think to insist that this is how it must be translated, is showing a modern western hangup. Ancient people (and modern people from traditional societies) aren't so worried about the idea of a sovereign God doing things that may seem unfair, being happy to admit that our understanding is limited. So they readily accept an equally possible translation, “Do not lead us into temptation”.
Thank you for the video Sir! :) I have a question about the verb εἰσενέγκῃς in Matt 6:13: In the timestamp 14:14 in your lesson you say that it's an imperative. If we parse the verb εἰσενέγκῃς would it not be considered a subjunctive, 2nd, singular, active, aorist? If so, does it slightly change the meaning of the clause or does it work exactly as an imperative would (hence why you classify it as an imperative in your video)? Kind regards.
I find the use of both epiousion (for the coming day) and semeron (today) in regards to 'bread' confusing as it seems redundant. Would it be too odd to render its meaning as "may the nourisment belonging to our future day (making allusion to a future state of spiritual understanding) be made available to us today". In other words may you provide our food to foster our spiritual becoming??
Interesting idea. I don't have the ICC Matthew commentary to hand to see if they have anything to say about that. But I don't think anyone could rule your idea out. One argument for it is that every other verse in the prayer is talking about spiritual things, so verse 11 would seem out of place if it's just about ordinary bread. But on the other hand, we could say that we shouldn't spiritualise the whole thing; wasn't Jesus concerned about our everyday needs?
Thank you very much for your kind reply. I found a really interesting book chapter by the 20 century psychiatrist and new testament scholar Maurice Nicoll regarding the word epiousion (he claimes this word is not found in classical Greek). "THE Prodigal Son finds that famine surrounds him and remembers that there is bread and enough in his father's house. But, as was said, neither this famine nor this bread are to be taken literally. The bread that is lacking to the Prodigal Son is not literal bread; and, similarly, when it is said in the Lord's Prayer: 'Give us this day our daily bread,' it is not literal bread that is meant. Let us take the meaning of bread in the Lord's Prayer. The word translated here as daily is unknown in classical Greek and is used in the New Testament only in the two places where the Lord's Prayer is given (Matthew vi.11 and Luke xi.3). The Greek word is epi-ousios (επιούσιος), and this word, like the word metanoia, is not a word that can be easily understood or rendered by any simple translation. The word epiousios does not mean daily. It has a far more complicated meaning. Although this has always been realised and many interpretations have been given, the translation both in the Authorised and Revised Versions of the New Testament remains as daily. And so most people perhaps imagine that daily bread is meant and believe that they are asking for enough to eat, day by day, in a literal sense. Those who have plenty of bread to eat, mouth these words without understanding them and, if they think at all of the meaning of the words they are saying, they believe they must refer to poor people who lack sufficient nourishment. They do not think that it is extraordinary that this phrase, which comes so early in the Lord's Prayer, should refer simply to physical nourishment; and they see nothing strange in the context: 'Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses.' The request for 'daily bread' is the first personal request made in the Lord's Prayer and therefore the most important; and it is followed by the second personal request: 'Forgive us.' That is, after the tremendous significance of the opening phrases of the Lord's Prayer, which have so far only been touched upon at one point - namely, that God's will is not done on earth - people let themselves think that the whole level of the prayer is suddenly changed and a personal request for literal food is made, followed by the second personal request that our sins should be forgiven, That is, they believe that the first request is a physical one; and, although they realise that the forgiveness of sins must be something far greater, something spiritual, and so psychological in the deepest sense, they do not see anything odd in the fact that this request for daily bread should come first. There are three personal requests in the Lord's Prayer - the first for 'daily bread', the second for 'forgiveness', and the third 'not to be led into temptation'. At this point the prayer ends. This is the original form of the Prayer, But there were added to it the words: 'for thine is the Kingdom and the power and the glory for ever and ever Amen.' In the form given in Matthew and in Luke, the only two Gospels which give the Lord's Prayer, these latter words do not occur in the Revised Version, although they are included in the Authorised Version, in Matthew's rendering of the Prayer. In the Parable of the Prodigal Son it is clear that once a man turns in himself and goes in an opposite direction - and this reversal is clearly enough presented in the merely outer pictorial form of the parable - he goes in a direction where he can get bread and enough, an can be reached, and after praying that God's will may be done on earth, and thus individually in a man, in the 'Earth' of a man, the sensory man, the first personal request is that what is his own, and thus real, may be given nourishment. This is no ordinary bread that is asked for, but the very food through which a man can grow internally, in his own being, in his own thought, in his own feeling, in his own understanding. But if this transformation or re-birth of a man - with which the Gospels are solely concerned and of which they speak in almost every line - if this transformation is possible, there must be something internally close to or touching every man which, if he can hear, if he can feel and begin to understand and eventually follow, will lead him to metanoia, to this re-turning, and thus to an entirely new sense of himself and the meaning of his life on earth. In the word epi-ousios, the particle epi (έπι), in its most primitive sense denotes position - namely, the position of anything that is resting upon something else, and so, above it and touching it. Thus the full meaning of this word, translated as daily, in its connection with the following word bread (which in the Greek is the ordinary word for bread, άρτος), signifies that that which is real in a man, what is his own, and what he has lost, is just above and touching him; and this part of the Lord's Prayer is a personal request to feel what has been lost, this lost feeling, and to feel it now - this day, this moment - because this feeling is food - not literal food - but the food that enables a man to become alive. When the younger son in the parable 'came to himself, he felt the first traces of this feeling, of this food, which he had forgotten - and so he turned and began to recognise himself anew."
Sir, I'm watching this video of yours again, and I'm surprise to learn that the last part of the prayer is not Matthew's. Is it not SIN to add a "dot" of the holy scripture? Why Pastors and Priests allowed this?
As I explain in the video, the translation put forward by the Pope is possible. But it simply wasn't an issue to people of Jesus' time. Seems it's much harder for modern people to humble themselves under the mighty hand of God...
@@rossandelizabethmckerras Thank you, I just needed some closure. I was perplexed with James 1:13, but after reading the whole passage it more or less made sense. Also, I just realized that God was the one who made the forbidden tree, and placed it in the garden of Eden ready for picking.
I was thinking exactly that! We are told that Jesus was "led by the (Holy) Spirit into the (desert/wilderness) (to be /And was) tempted." I've not come across any ambiguity as to cause/allow here: the third person of the Holy Trinity actively caused Jesus to undergo a test, as the previous commentator 'Which' (Japanese) mentioned the forbidden fruit test in Eden. So could you comment on the 'mode'(?) of the verb here? (Pope Bergoglio clearly has an agenda of destroying 2,000 years of Catholic teaching, so even this apparently innocuous change I resist.)
Could the word, temptation, testing also be translated as Trial? Because James says Jehovah does not tempt anyone... So... But of cause Trial could be understood in 2 ways... As to say Trial in the way of testing or the future trial where we are to stand before Jehovah being Judged. Some talk about Evil one... like free us from the Evil one*1... and not free us from evil.... I really have some issues with that prayer as how to understand some of it. *1 as to be understood as the Accuser or Satan that old Deceptive Snake and Dragon.
Yes, you're right; although in modern English 'trial' has come to take an extreme meaning, very difficult circumstances; or else the trial run of a new machine, etc.
Interesting idea you have there... don't allow us to be tested but free us from the evil one. As to say, don't allow Satan to setup traps for us like he was allowed against Job.
@@jesuslovesmegalatians2205 Ahh, have to check if its the same word, thanks. Should do a search on the word of cause. But James are telling us God does not tempt us and we should not say that he does.
@@AndersErichsen-rr7vs I God leads us to temptation like how his servant Bob was tested in trials but the temptation to fall away or lose faith or sin etc comes from within, ie our carnel or sinful nature
correct writing is αφιεμεν (denotes now) not αφηκαμεν (denotes past). μη εισενεγκης... translates as 'do not leave us to be transferred inside sin' and in even more detail, 'not to allow for us to face sins greater than our spiritual condition can manage' ! best wishes...
thanks. Luke and the Didache use the present instead of Matthew's αφηκαμεν, which may be due to Aramaic-influenced Greek. 'not to allow for us to face sins greater than our spiritual condition can manage' is a good thing to pray.
Thank you. I now have to get a vIdo going over just the pronunciation. Two comments: 1. 'Daily bread'. Catholic commentators say this is 'supersubstantial' bread if I remember right, referring to the confection of the Eucharistic at each Mass. (Those who think Jesus drove most of his followers away over a mere symbol have glossed over John 6. Time and again Jesus tried to drive the point home (e.g. 'Unless you GNAW on my flesh') but failed then, and the past 500 yrs with many. Just sayin'. 2. You say 'the wrongs/sins we have done/committed' is the best we can do for the 'present continuous habitual'. How about 'we have been committing'? Thanks!
Based on etymology, I think that the Catholic commentators are correct. Epi = Super Ousion = Substantial or "Essential" in the sense of "essence" For example, in the Nicene Creed, we say that the Father and His Son are of one "ousios" in Greek, meaning of one essence or of the same substance. I take it that this word is referring to the idea that the food is heavenly, that the bread has in some sense a substance that is above normal bread. I can see how this rendering could relate indirectly to the Catholic/Lutheran/Orthodox understanding of the communion bread food elements having the "substance" of Christ's body. Wikipedia says about the translation of this word as "Daily": "This rests on the analysis of epi as for and ousia as being; the word would mean 'for the [day] being' with day being implicit. This version is based on the Latin rendering of epiousios as quotidianum, rather than the alternative Latin translation of supersubstantialem. This quotidianum interpretation is first recorded in the works of Tertullian. This was used in the Vetus Latina, a collective term for various 'Old Latin' Bible translations prior to Jerome's Vulgate."
Sir/Madam, can you tell me who this (God) Father that your talking about is that we have to pray to. And what is His Name? Cause we are told in the second sentence of the lords prayer to keep his name holy. SO WHAT IS HIS NAME? For what I know Father & God are titles. If we his creation have names then how can the Father the creator not have or create a name for himself. How can I address Him if I don't even know His name. For me prayer is like posting a letter to someone. How can you post to or address a person if you don't know his name (let alone knowing his address). So all this explation is useless without knowing the person's name. If your telling me to pray to someone then I need to know who he is. Now if you say the name is Jesus then it is wrong. Cause Jesus himself said to pray to the father. And if you say God is the father then we know Satan is the God of this world. So we made Satan our father that we pray to. Hence I ask this important question before any explanation given, that is what is this fathers name? Who am I really talking or praying to? Please tell me this first. Father/God could be the devil too. How do I identify? No one is telling what this persons name is??????? Hope you get my point.
YHWY..." Pronounced "Yah whey "is the ancient name of God the Father..Yeshua pronounced " yeah shoo ah"..is Jesus..all most go through Jesus...Yeshua to get to God...Jesus/Yeshua made this very clear in scripture.
![[LIVE] นาทีนี้ต้องพี่ทนาย | ทนายแก้ว vs ทนายไพศาล | #คุยให้เด็กมันฟัง EP.47 (02/11/67)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HmquaO-PL_M/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for your explanation. I am watching from Zambia
Wonderful!
Hello sir, I am a Christian convert from Turkey. I just got interested in Koine and I thank you for all your efforts here on TH-cam. May God bless you and your work!
Thanks. I am pleased and encouraged that you find my videos helpful.
Thank you for this video Mr. Mckerras, it was very helpful to me. I was searching for videos like this as I believed it was best when learning a language to learn from living usage of the language rather than textbook memorisation, so it was nice to see you allude to this point of view in your previous video on the Lord's Prayer. There was also the added bonus of some very interesting pieces of linguistic knowledge in this video, and I also found out that my knowledge of grammar itself is lacking if I wish to learn a new language!
Thanks for the encouragement
Yes, it works exactly as an imperative would. My Greek grammar book calls it an 'aorist subjunctive of prohibition'.
Thank you for explaining the Lord's Prayer. I don't know if you make it on purpose, but the h sound (like HHero) you pronounce before words like ημάς, was used by the ancient Greeks when they were talking (it's not used today) and in general your pronounciation is fantastic! So, as much I know, in our New Testament, the Lord's Prayer is written in Ellinistiki Koine. As you probably know, there are so many ancient Greek Dialects, but I'll focus on Ellinistiki Koine. So, here's the pronunciation, which I tried to make to its best version, but isn't 100% accurate because Greek, as well as English, has it's own unique sounds. "Pater eemon, o en tis ouraniss, ayiasthito to onoma sou, eltheto e vasilia sou, yenithito to thelema sou, os en ourano kee epe tis yis, ton arton imon ton epeousion, dos (like THey) imin simeron, ke afes imin ta ofilimata imon, os ke emis afiemen tis ofiletes imon, ke mi isenegkis emas is perasmon, alla rese emas apo tou ponirou. Ameen." The translation into English is very good! I hope that I helped someone who wants to learn Greek or the Lord's Prayer itself (called from us as "Κυριακή Προσευχή Kereake Prosefhi" or as usually known as "Πάτερ Ημών Pater eemon") Have a good day!
Thank you for that! I use Erasmus' pronunciation, which I realise is different from Koine pronunciation.
Its also been recited as, ".,forgive our trespasses.," "., as we forgive those who trespass against us.," rather than "debts"
The Greek word would normally mean 'debts' but Jewish speakers used the same word for both
I'm not sure how the English translation for "πονηροῦ" became "evil". In Greek, the translation for "πονηροῦ" is "cunning", "sly" and/or "sinister". Perhaps a word was needed that encompassed all the three traits? Great video. Thank you
In the NT its meaning is strongly influenced by the Hebrew word ra' and so it was the general term for 'bad', 'evil'.
it is not exact translation....
Ross, I was brought here by somebody criticizing Pope Francis for approving a new English translation of the Lord's Prayer. Apparently, rather than translating the line as, “Lead us not into temptation,” the researchers found, the passage should read, “Abandon us not when in temptation.”
I am very interested to hear your thoughts on this. I see that the Hebrew for this word can mean "Cause/allow", I can see that "Allow" may be an avenue to say that God may be "Abandoning" us into temptation.
“Do not abandon us when in temptation” is certainly a possible translation. However I think to insist that this is how it must be translated, is showing a modern western hangup. Ancient people (and modern people from traditional societies) aren't so worried about the idea of a sovereign God doing things that may seem unfair, being happy to admit that our understanding is limited. So they readily accept an equally possible translation, “Do not lead us into temptation”.
@@rossandelizabethmckerras thank you! Not to pressure you, but I'd love to see a video about this.
Okay, noted!
Thank you for the video Sir! :)
I have a question about the verb εἰσενέγκῃς in Matt 6:13:
In the timestamp 14:14 in your lesson you say that it's an imperative. If we parse the verb εἰσενέγκῃς would it not be considered a subjunctive, 2nd, singular, active, aorist? If so, does it slightly change the meaning of the clause or does it work exactly as an imperative would (hence why you classify it as an imperative in your video)?
Kind regards.
Yes. It's technically called an 'aorist subjunctive of prohibition'
@@rossandelizabethmckerras Thank you sir
I find the use of both epiousion (for the coming day) and semeron (today) in regards to 'bread' confusing as it seems redundant.
Would it be too odd to render its meaning as "may the nourisment belonging to our future day (making allusion to a future state of spiritual understanding) be made available to us today". In other words may you provide our food to foster our spiritual becoming??
Interesting idea. I don't have the ICC Matthew commentary to hand to see if they have anything to say about that. But I don't think anyone could rule your idea out. One argument for it is that every other verse in the prayer is talking about spiritual things, so verse 11 would seem out of place if it's just about ordinary bread. But on the other hand, we could say that we shouldn't spiritualise the whole thing; wasn't Jesus concerned about our everyday needs?
Thank you very much for your kind reply. I found a really interesting book chapter by the 20 century psychiatrist and new testament scholar Maurice Nicoll regarding the word epiousion (he claimes this word is not found in classical Greek).
"THE Prodigal Son finds that famine surrounds him and remembers that there is bread and enough in his father's house. But, as was said, neither this famine nor this bread are to be taken literally. The bread that is lacking to the Prodigal Son is not literal bread; and, similarly, when it is said in the Lord's Prayer: 'Give us this day our daily bread,' it is not literal bread that is meant. Let us take the meaning of bread in the Lord's Prayer. The word translated here as daily is unknown in classical Greek and is used in the New Testament only in the two places where the Lord's Prayer is given (Matthew vi.11 and Luke xi.3). The Greek word is epi-ousios (επιούσιος), and this word, like the word metanoia, is not a word that can be easily understood or rendered by any simple translation. The word epiousios does not mean daily. It has a far more complicated meaning. Although this has always been realised and many interpretations have been given, the translation both in the Authorised and Revised Versions of the New Testament remains as daily. And so most people perhaps imagine that daily bread is meant and believe that they are asking for enough to eat, day by day, in a literal sense. Those who have plenty of bread to eat, mouth these words without understanding them and, if they think at all of the meaning of the words they are saying, they believe they must refer to poor people who lack sufficient nourishment. They do not think that it is extraordinary that this phrase, which comes so early in the Lord's Prayer, should refer simply to physical nourishment; and they see nothing strange in the context: 'Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses.' The request for 'daily bread' is the first personal request made in the Lord's Prayer and therefore the most important; and it is followed by the second personal request: 'Forgive us.' That is, after the tremendous significance of the opening phrases of the Lord's Prayer, which have so far only been touched upon at one point - namely, that God's will is not done on earth - people let themselves think that the whole level of the prayer is suddenly changed and a personal request for literal food is made, followed by the second personal request that our sins should be forgiven, That is, they believe that the first request is a physical one; and, although they realise that the forgiveness of sins must be something far greater, something spiritual, and so psychological in the deepest sense, they do not see anything odd in the fact that this request for daily bread should come first. There are three personal requests in the Lord's Prayer - the first for 'daily bread', the second for 'forgiveness', and the third 'not to be led into temptation'. At this point the prayer ends. This is the original form of the Prayer, But there were added to it the words: 'for thine is the Kingdom and the power and the glory for ever and ever Amen.' In the form given in Matthew and in Luke, the only two Gospels which give the Lord's Prayer, these latter words do not occur in the Revised Version, although they are included in the Authorised Version, in Matthew's rendering of the Prayer. In the Parable of the Prodigal Son it is clear that once a man turns in himself and goes in an opposite direction - and this reversal is clearly enough presented in the merely outer pictorial form of the parable - he goes in a direction where he can get bread and enough, an can be reached, and after praying that God's will may be done on earth, and thus individually in a man, in the 'Earth' of a man, the sensory man, the first personal request is that what is his own, and thus real, may be given nourishment. This is no ordinary bread that is asked for, but the very food through which a man can grow internally, in his own being, in his own thought, in his own feeling, in his own understanding. But if this transformation or re-birth of a man - with which the Gospels are solely concerned and of which they speak in almost every line - if this transformation is possible, there must be something internally close to or touching every man which, if he can hear, if he can feel and begin to understand and eventually follow, will lead him to metanoia, to this re-turning, and thus to an entirely new sense of himself and the meaning of his life on earth. In the word epi-ousios, the particle epi (έπι), in its most primitive sense denotes position - namely, the position of anything that is resting upon something else, and so, above it and touching it. Thus the full meaning of this word, translated as daily, in its connection with the following word bread (which in the Greek is the ordinary word for bread, άρτος), signifies that that which is real in a man, what is his own, and what he has lost, is just above and touching him; and this part of the Lord's Prayer is a personal request to feel what has been lost, this lost feeling, and to feel it now - this day, this moment - because this feeling is food - not literal food - but the food that enables a man to become alive. When the younger son in the parable 'came to himself, he felt the first traces of this feeling, of this food, which he had forgotten - and so he turned and began to recognise himself anew."
Very interesting. Thank you for sharing that.
11:18
Time stamp for a friend 😊
Sir, I'm watching this video of yours again, and I'm surprise to learn that the last part of the prayer is not Matthew's. Is it not SIN to add a "dot" of the holy scripture? Why Pastors and Priests allowed this?
Good question. But the addition comes from Scripture anyway (1 Chronicles 29) and it must have been popularly used in a lot of churches.
what can you say about the change of the Lord's prayer by the pope? there has been a large negative feedback
As I explain in the video, the translation put forward by the Pope is possible. But it simply wasn't an issue to people of Jesus' time. Seems it's much harder for modern people to humble themselves under the mighty hand of God...
@@rossandelizabethmckerras Thank you, I just needed some closure. I was perplexed with James 1:13, but after reading the whole passage it more or less made sense. Also, I just realized that God was the one who made the forbidden tree, and placed it in the garden of Eden ready for picking.
I was thinking exactly that!
We are told that Jesus was "led by the (Holy) Spirit into the (desert/wilderness) (to be /And was) tempted."
I've not come across any ambiguity as to cause/allow here: the third person of the Holy Trinity actively caused Jesus to undergo a test, as the previous commentator 'Which' (Japanese) mentioned the forbidden fruit test in Eden. So could you comment on the 'mode'(?) of the verb here? (Pope Bergoglio clearly has an agenda of destroying 2,000 years of Catholic teaching, so even this apparently innocuous change I resist.)
Could the word, temptation, testing also be translated as Trial? Because James says Jehovah does not tempt anyone... So... But of cause Trial could be understood in 2 ways... As to say Trial in the way of testing or the future trial where we are to stand before Jehovah being Judged.
Some talk about Evil one... like free us from the Evil one*1... and not free us from evil....
I really have some issues with that prayer as how to understand some of it.
*1 as to be understood as the Accuser or Satan that old Deceptive Snake and Dragon.
Yes, you're right; although in modern English 'trial' has come to take an extreme meaning, very difficult circumstances; or else the trial run of a new machine, etc.
Interesting idea you have there... don't allow us to be tested but free us from the evil one. As to say, don't allow Satan to setup traps for us like he was allowed against Job.
@@AndersErichsen-rr7vsMatthew 4:1
Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted there by the devil.
@@jesuslovesmegalatians2205 Ahh, have to check if its the same word, thanks. Should do a search on the word of cause. But James are telling us God does not tempt us and we should not say that he does.
@@AndersErichsen-rr7vs I God leads us to temptation like how his servant Bob was tested in trials but the temptation to fall away or lose faith or sin etc comes from within, ie our carnel or sinful nature
correct writing is αφιεμεν (denotes now) not αφηκαμεν (denotes past). μη εισενεγκης... translates as 'do not leave us to be transferred inside sin' and in even more detail, 'not to allow for us to face sins greater than our spiritual condition can manage' ! best wishes...
thanks. Luke and the Didache use the present instead of Matthew's αφηκαμεν, which may be due to Aramaic-influenced Greek.
'not to allow for us to face sins greater than our spiritual condition can manage' is a good thing to pray.
Thank you. I now have to get a vIdo going over just the pronunciation.
Two comments:
1. 'Daily bread'. Catholic commentators say this is 'supersubstantial' bread if I remember right, referring to the confection of the Eucharistic at each Mass. (Those who think Jesus drove most of his followers away over a mere symbol have glossed over John 6. Time and again Jesus tried to drive the point home (e.g. 'Unless you GNAW on my flesh') but failed then, and the past 500 yrs with many. Just sayin'.
2. You say 'the wrongs/sins we have done/committed' is the best we can do for the 'present continuous habitual'. How about 'we have been committing'? Thanks!
1. The word translated 'daily' is rare and of uncertain meaning
2. Good suggestion.
Based on etymology, I think that the Catholic commentators are correct.
Epi = Super
Ousion = Substantial or "Essential" in the sense of "essence"
For example, in the Nicene Creed, we say that the Father and His Son are of one "ousios" in Greek, meaning of one essence or of the same substance.
I take it that this word is referring to the idea that the food is heavenly, that the bread has in some sense a substance that is above normal bread.
I can see how this rendering could relate indirectly to the Catholic/Lutheran/Orthodox understanding of the communion bread food elements having the "substance" of Christ's body.
Wikipedia says about the translation of this word as "Daily":
"This rests on the analysis of epi as for and ousia as being; the word would mean 'for the [day] being' with day being implicit. This version is based on the Latin rendering of epiousios as quotidianum, rather than the alternative Latin translation of supersubstantialem. This quotidianum interpretation is first recorded in the works of Tertullian. This was used in the Vetus Latina, a collective term for various 'Old Latin' Bible translations prior to Jerome's Vulgate."
Ηαμορτια ?
Sir/Madam, can you tell me who this (God) Father that your talking about is that we have to pray to. And what is His Name? Cause we are told in the second sentence of the lords prayer to keep his name holy. SO WHAT IS HIS NAME? For what I know Father & God are titles. If we his creation have names then how can the Father the creator not have or create a name for himself. How can I address Him if I don't even know His name. For me prayer is like posting a letter to someone. How can you post to or address a person if you don't know his name (let alone knowing his address). So all this explation is useless without knowing the person's name. If your telling me to pray to someone then I need to know who he is. Now if you say the name is Jesus then it is wrong. Cause Jesus himself said to pray to the father. And if you say God is the father then we know Satan is the God of this world. So we made Satan our father that we pray to. Hence I ask this important question before any explanation given, that is what is this fathers name? Who am I really talking or praying to? Please tell me this first. Father/God could be the devil too. How do I identify? No one is telling what this persons name is??????? Hope you get my point.
Good question. I discuss the answer in my video 'The Sacred Hebrew Name of God'.
YHWY..." Pronounced "Yah whey "is the ancient name of God the Father..Yeshua pronounced " yeah shoo ah"..is Jesus..all most go through Jesus...Yeshua to get to God...Jesus/Yeshua made this very clear in scripture.
Not most....must...typo..