Pater Noster and Authority

I was telling someone about the txt version of the Pater Noster, when I stumbled on an interesting debate which kind of relates to the primacy of Scripture over tradition. It centers around the Greek word Epiousios. The flexibility of Greek allows several translations for this word, some which imply taking no thought for tomorrow, some which imply looking to the future, and some which imply Eucharistic meaning.

For me, of course, this leads to the larger question of Authority. When there are multiple translations which promote different takes on doctrinal issues, whose interpretation do you trust? Or, as I said before, without an infallble AND inerrant AND authoritative interpreter, does it matter if the source document is itself any of those?

Further, is it absolutely necessary for there to be some infallible, inerrant, authoritative source? We all seem to be suffering from the fallacious Appeal to Authority. We all accept that Christ IS the Authority and the full Revelation. So what you'll notice is that each of the traditions connects their secondary authority to Christ. For Protestants the Bible is (and this really bothers me) called The Word of God. Catholics have THE Vicar of Christ. Orthodox have their councils. In each tradition, there are those who say their source is, and must be, both infallible, inerrant and authoritative. So I point to the councils and you point to the Bible and he points to the Pope and, again, we're stuck.

I ask again, is it necessary?