Charles Ellicott Commentary Matthew 6:11

"Give us this day our daily bread." — Matthew 6:11 (ASV)

Give us this day our daily bread — A surprising obscurity hangs over these words that are so familiar to us. The word translated "daily" is found nowhere else, with the one exception of the parallel passage in Luke 11:3. As far as we can judge, it must have been coined for this purpose as the best equivalent for the unknown Aramaic word our Lord actually used. We are therefore left to consider its possible derivation and what seems most in harmony with the spirit of our Lord’s teaching, consistent with that derivation.

The form of the word (see the note in the Excursus) allows for several meanings:

1. Bread sufficient for the day now coming;
2. Sufficient for tomorrow;
3. Sufficient for existence;
4. Over and above material substance—or, as the Vulgate renders it, panis supersubstantialis.

Of these, the first two are the most commonly accepted, and the idea they convey is expressed in the translation "daily bread." Understood this way, it is a simple petition for "food convenient for us," like the prayer of Agur in Proverbs 30:8. As such, it has been uttered by countless childlike hearts and has served as a witness against both over-anxiety and far-reaching desires for worldly prosperity.

It is with some hesitation, considering such general agreement among authorities, that I feel compelled to say the last meaning seems to me the truest. Let us remember:

1. The words with which our Lord answered the Tempter: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4).
2. His application of those words in, "I have meat to eat that you do not know of" (John 4:32).
3. His own use of bread as the symbol of that which sustains the spiritual life (John 6:27–58).
4. The warnings in Matthew 6:25-31 not only against anxiety about what we shall eat and drink, but against seeking these things instead of seeking simply the kingdom of God and His righteousness.

When we consider these points, I think we can scarcely fail to see that He meant His disciples, in this model prayer, to seek for the nourishment of the higher and not the lower life. Understood this way, the petition is not a contrast to the rest of the prayer but is in perfect harmony with it. The entire prayer elevates us to a realm of thought where we leave all concerns of our earthly life in our Father's hands, not even asking for the supply of its simplest wants, but seeking only that He would sustain and perfect the higher life of our spirit.

Therefore, when we ask for "daily bread," we do not mean common food, but the "Bread from heaven, which gives life to the world." Thus, the reality symbolized by the Eucharistic bread is the Lord’s gracious answer to the prayer He has taught us.

The Word "Daily" in Matthew 6:11

The word ἐπιούσιος has been derived in two main ways. First, from ἡ ἐπιοῦσα (scilicet, ἡμέρα), meaning "the day that is coming on." This meaning is supported by the fact that Jerome says the Hebrew Gospel circulating in his time used the word mahar (meaning crastinus, or "for tomorrow"), resulting in "tomorrow's bread." It is also supported by the very early rendering quotidianum in the Latin versions. On the other hand, this meaning introduces a strange redundancy into Luke’s version of the prayer: "Give us day by day... our daily bread."

Second, the other derivation connects it with οὐσία (in one of its many senses) and with ἐπὶ (meaning either "for" or "over"). The preposition's former meaning suggests "for our existence or subsistence," while the latter suggests Jerome's supersubstantialis—that is, "over or above our material substance." It is true that in classical Greek the form would have been ἐπούσιος, not ἐπιούσιος. However, it is clear this difficulty did not prevent a scholar like Jerome from accepting the derivation. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the Hellenistic Jew who first translated our Lord’s discourses would be more grammatically precise than Jerome when coining a word he felt was needed to express our Lord’s meaning.

Since the derivation is plausible, we must ask which of the two meanings of οὐσία and of ἐπὶ gives the most force to the clause. For the reasons given above, I am led to decide in favor of the latter. New words would hardly have been needed for the meanings "daily" or "sufficient." When a word is coined, it can be fairly assumed it was needed to express a new thought. The new thought here was the one our Lord later developed in John 6: that a person's spirit needs sustenance no less than the body, and that this sustenance is found in the "bread of God which comes down from heaven" (John 6:33). The student should, however, consult Dr. Lightfoot’s admirable excursus on the word in his Hints on a Revised Version of the New Testament.

Assuming the Lord’s Prayer included and spiritualized the highest thoughts previously expressed by devout Israelites, we may note a point against the meaning of "bread for tomorrow." Rabbi Eliezer said, "He who has a crumb left in his pouch and asks, ‘What shall I eat tomorrow?’ belongs to those of little faith."

Admittedly, it is difficult to conjecture what Aramaic word could correspond to this meaning of ἐπιούσιος. The fact that a word with the other meaning was readily available—and was actually found in the Hebrew Gospel in the fourth century—carries some weight for the opposing view. However, that word may not have been a translation of the original Aramaic, but rather a re-translation of the Latin quotidianus. The fact that Jerome, knowing this, chose a different rendering here while retaining quotidianus in Luke 11:3, shows he was not satisfied with it. Perhaps, in the end, he was caught between two opinions.