Lord/LORD
This very day in King David’s hometown a Savior was born for you. He is Christ the Lord. (Luke 2:11, CEV)
This
sentence announcing the birth of Jesus is very familiar to many,
although the version is a little different. I am using it to introduce that
final word, “Lord”. This word is an example of one which requires
translators and publishers to interpret for us.
An interaction from the last days of Jesus’ time on earth contains the same word used twice but with a difference.
Then, surrounded by the Pharisees, Jesus asked them a question: “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?”
They replied, “He is the son of David.”
Jesus responded, “Then why does David, speaking under the inspiration of the Spirit, call the Messiah ‘my Lord’? For David said,
‘The LORD said to my Lord,
Sit in the place of honor at my right hand
until I humble your enemies beneath your feet.’[a]
Since David called the Messiah ‘my Lord,’ how can the Messiah be his son?”
No one could answer him. And after that, no one dared to ask him any more questions. Matthew 22:41-46 (NLT)
Almost
word for word, all three synoptic Gospels include Jesus quoting the
Psalm (110), as part of a conversation between himself and Pharisees in
Jerusalem during that final week. In that moment at least, that
particular quotation, as Jesus used it, was a conversation stopper!
Nothing more to be said! Surely that was an unforgettable and loaded
moment.*
The three Gospels also have Jesus publicly
introducing the inflammatory “Christ” word at that time. (The NLT
translators have rendered that word, and pronouns, as “Messiah” - on
which, see previous post re “Christ”).
I suppose then
the moment was one in which you could “hear a pin drop”. Did they “hold
their breath” waiting for what Jesus would say next about their
“Messiah”? Was he hinting at a claim? This was Jerusalem at the time of
the festival. How much would it take to get the people roused against
the Romans (and the Jewish elite)? Did the governor (Pontius Pilate)
have ears listening and reporting? (Very likely - how could he not?) Was
there a sigh of relief as the “Christ” topic lapsed for a while until
Jesus’ trial? (Then, at that juncture, despite the brevity of the
account, does not Pilate appear informed on the political?)
The
Psalm quotation brings up the “lord” word. The Greek Old Testament (OT)
of the Psalm, known as the Septuagint (LXX), uses in both instances the
one Greek word, “kurios/kyrios”. The Hebrew Psalm 110 text has
different words. The first Hebrew word may be transliterated and perhaps
represented by the unpronounced (see footnote) consonants “YHWH” (no
vowels). The second word is the Hebrew equivalent of “lord”.
Two
(at least) issues now come up. In over 6,000 places the translators of
the old King James Bible represented the YHWH by “LORD”. (For example,
Jeremiah includes the word over 600 times; Deuteronomy 438 times.) It is
true that Exodus 6:4 says that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did not know
God by God’s special name (“YHWH”) - see chapters 3-6 of Exodus.
However, starting from 2:4, Genesis has the “YHWH” word 141 times; note
especially 12:8. Superficially at least there is a conundrum here which
can yield a fertile field for exploration and theorising.
In
the NT (Jesus') quote from the Psalm above, the NLT, like the King James
Version, retains the approach of representing the Hebrew Psalm’s word,
“YHWH”, by LORD, even though the Greek (LXX and NT) uses the one and the
same “kyrios” word (twice). We know this Greek word as “lord”. The
“lord” word is used in differing ways, as for sir/Sir in English.
Here
are two simple examples of words sharing the notion of subservience but
used differently: “Yes, sir”, and, “Sir Dick Jones”. The word “lord”
(“kyrios”) is similarly used differently and it requires thought as
applied to Jesus. Leaving aside the matter of doing full justice to the
OT LORD, notice that the use (or not) of capitalisation (Lord/lord) is
interpretative - no help there in the original.
Jesus'
contemporary, the powerful Roman "General" we know as Augustus
reportedly would not allow the (Latin) word for "Lord" to be addressed
to him. He preferred "Caesar". This was in keeping with the public
picture of his "first citizen" role being by "consent of the governed",
or even desire of the citizens. (Despite expert opinion, I actually
think it unlikely Augustus discouraged that word from slaves.)
Jesus
brought up the word "Lord": Was there a
tension at that time due also to that word?
Another
well-known if unrecognised example of the use of the Greek “kyrios” to
represent the OT’s “YHWH” had come in the quotation on the start of
Jesus’ final week. Matthew 21, verse 9 includes words from Psalm 118:
Jesus was in the center of the procession, and the people all around him were shouting,
“Praise God[a] for the Son of David!
Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the LORD!
Praise God in highest heaven!”[b] (NLT)
Once
again translations take different approaches to the “kyrios”. NLT
retains their Psalm rendition, though the Matthew text does not (can
not) make the distinction.
Consider also this extract from the resurrection scene:
As
soon as Mary said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there.
But she did not know who he was. Jesus asked her, “Why are you crying?
Who are you looking for?”
She thought he was the gardener and said, “Sir, if you have taken his body away, please tell me, so I can go and get him.”
Then Jesus said to her, “Mary!”
She turned and said to him, “Rabboni.” The Aramaic word “Rabboni” means “Teacher.”
Jesus
told her, “Don’t hold on to me! I have not yet gone to the Father. But
tell my disciples that I am going to the one who is my Father and my
God, as well as your Father and your God.” Mary Magdalene then went and
told the disciples that she had seen the Lord. She also told them what
he had said to her. (John 20: 14-18, CEV)
The
same “kyrios” (lord) word is translated as “sir” (to the supposed
“gardener”) and as “Lord” - the one whom she had seen. Now look a little further
on:
Thomas
answered him, “My Lord and my God!” Jesus said to him, “Have you
believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen
and yet have come to believe.” (John 20:28-29, NRSV)
That
same “kyrios” word is given greater weight in the speech of the
convinced Thomas. A title for Jesus - yes - but Thomas is making a
personal commitment. This same commitment with Jesus’ blessing is open
to you today.
Like in the case of “Christ”, the word
“Lord” was closely identified with the person of the (risen) Jesus. The
newly convinced Cleopas rushed back to Jerusalem with his friend to
share their news.
And
within the hour they were on their way back to Jerusalem. There they
found the eleven disciples and the others who had gathered with them,
who said, “The Lord has really risen! He appeared to Peter.[e]” (Luke 24: 33-34, NLT)
A
report from the day of Jesus’ resurrection gives one clear New
Testament (NT) use of “Lord” meaning “Almighty God”, or “The God of
Heaven”. In Matthew 28: 2 we have:
There
was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from
heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. (NIV)
There
was a time (or period) of ambivalence about the meaning of “Lord”, as
addressed to Jesus. Here is a report from a highly significant moment:
From
then on, Jesus began telling his disciples what would happen to him. He
said, “I must go to Jerusalem. There the nation’s leaders, the chief
priests, and the teachers of the Law of Moses will make me suffer
terribly. I will be killed, but three days later I will rise to life.”
Peter took Jesus aside and told him to stop talking like that. He said, “God would never let this happen to you, Lord!”
Jesus
turned to Peter and said, “Satan, get away from me! You’re in my way
because you think like everyone else and not like God.” (Matthew 16: 21-23, CEV)
Peter is using the title “lord” (or, “Lord”) but - he rejects what Jesus has said and corrects him!
After
the resurrection it is impossible to imagine Peter taking such an
attitude. The truth about Jesus was plain to see - if one had eyes to
see, that is. Still today, those with eyes to see can know him.
Here is Peter speaking for himself (post resurrection and post Pentecost):
Therefore
let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made
him both Lord and Messiah,[a] this Jesus whom you crucified.” Acts 2:36 (NRSV).
The book of Acts contains similar statements of conviction, as do almost all the other NT writings.
A
convinced, dedicated, energetic and able man (Saul) was sincerely wrong
and determined to overthrow any idea that Jesus was Lord, or Messiah,
or Saviour. He experienced an astonishing confrontation (Acts 9) and
later as Paul was able to write of Jesus that he had been truly Servant
and is indeed truly Lord (LORD) - see following. By reading the Gospels
you may understand Jesus as the Servant of the Lord and the Lamb of God,
humbly giving his life for your redemption and mine. I see the contrast
between Jesus and the late Augustus' political "humility" and final end
(still dominant). I wonder if Paul did not know of the Caesars' ways.
... Jesus Christ, who
though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to the point of death—
even death on a cross.
Therefore God also highly exalted him
and gave him the name
that is above every name,
so that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bend,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue should confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father. Philippians 2:6-11 (NRSV)
ADDENDUM
Here
now are two reports in which Jesus has severe words for community
service under his “brand”, however intentioned, or even lip-service, and
he has no time for trading on his title. (The same word “Lord” occurs
in both places.) First see this grim warning contains a more central
issue than questions about titles actually uttered…
“Not
everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of
heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On
that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your
name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in
your name?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from
me, you evildoers.’ (Matthew 7:21-23, NRSV)
And we may compare Luke’s brief question:
“Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I tell you? (Luke 6:46, NRSV)
Luke’s
comparable passage has similar context but is clearly not identical. We
can hardly miss the similarity. (Do you know any substantial reason to
exclude the possibility of Jesus saying similar things at different
points in the chronology?)
The name you or I use for Jesus fades
into insignificance beside what you or I "do with" him, what you or I do
about what he said, what relationship you or I have with him (e.g., my
Saviour, or, the Saviour?).
Footnote
The Unpronounced Name of God
The
old translations understood JHVH to represent the Hebrew. Vowels
(pointings) of another substituted Hebrew word (for "Lord") were
attached (in the text) to the consonants. (This indicated the word to be
pronounced.) Using those vowels and the consonants our translators
later created our word “Jehovah”, though they included the word
sparingly. More recently the representation is YHWH and the researchers
believe the vowels needed are provided by rendering the name as
“Yahweh”.
Wld Mss rcgns tht wrd f prnncd b n f s d nt knw nd dbt thr s n wy t tll. = Would Moses recognise that word if pronounced by one of us? I do not know and doubt there is any way to tell.
Language
is a multi-faceted phenomenon and other language direct equivalence and
correct pronunciation are difficult. Even for those with English as
their first language spoken English can be hard - ever heard someone
with an impenetrable “accent”? A Scot speaking may be hard for me to
understand, but if the same words are sung (eg, in a hymn) - no problem.
I find no hint in the NT that Jesus or his followers spent any time on
the (puzzle of the) unpronounced name. As shown above, in their translated
form, words which originally were of the God of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob are used of Jesus.
Do not misuse my name. I am the LORD your God, and I will punish anyone who misuses my name. (Exodus 20:7, CEV)
How
and when did the “unique” name of Exodus 3 become unpronounced? A
puzzle indeed, to which answers are given. But, would ceasing to
pronounce “God” or “Lord”, and instead using another substitute word,
enable the sanction to be avoided? Is there more to it?
God is wanting those who will give their trust to communicate directly with God.
*Aramaic? IF the Aramaic language was used between Jesus and the Pharisees, that could make a different question. However, although there are trace Aramaic words in the Greek New Testament, no Aramaic version has yet been published. Our oldest version of the New Testament documents are Greek. They are represented in vary large quantity; far, far, more I think than any other writing from the era.
Scripture quotations marked (CEV) are from the Contemporary English
Version Copyright © 1991, 1992, 1995 by American Bible Society, Used by
Permission.
Scripture
quotations marked (NIV) are taken from the Holy Bible, NEW
INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by
Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.
Scripture
quotations marked (NLT) are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living
Translation, copyright ©1996, 2004, 2007, 2013 by Tyndale House
Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol
Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved.
Scripture
quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Version
Bible, copyright © 1989 National Council of the Churches of Christ in
the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
AL
16/08/24
