Perhaps it is ignored because it is insoluble!
When we were going through the PEIRASMOS thread I suggested a look at J.C.
O'Neill's article in JSNT 51, 1993 which covers all of this in good detail.
He makes the point that it must be one of the two suggestions you come up
with but leans towards the "EPI+OUSIA" reading.
Pete Phillips,
Cliff College, Sheffield, England
p.m.phillips@cliff.shef.ac.uk
http://champness.shef.ac.uk/
You wrote:
TON ARTON hHMWN TON EPIOUSION DOS hHMIN SHMEION (Matt. 6.11 and par.)
I have no strong opinion on this and would be most interested to hear
how people unravel it