Often individuals who met Jesus are said to address him as “Lord.” The New Testament Greek word is “Kurios,” and is sometimes translated as “Sir,” such as “Sir, I perceive that you are a prophet,” (John 4:19) and “Sir, come down before my child dies,” (John 4:49). Kurios is also translated as "Master," a term frequently used by Peter, “Master, it is good for us to be here,” (Luke 9:33). In ancient Greece, kurios was applied to the master of a woman since women were not considered citizens in Greek society. So why do the English translators most often render the term as “Lord?”
In the Hebrew text, the most holy name of God is spelled YHWH. The Name is translated into English using all capital letters as “LORD.” When the Name was translated into the Greek Septuagint around 130 BC, the Hebrew authors chose the word “Kurios” for “LORD.” Since the New Testament Kurios was not YHVH, the King James translators rendered Kurios as “LORD” in only four passages: Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, and Acts 2:34. The NASU translators were a little better translating Kurios as LORD when the passage is a direct quotation from the Hebrew text. Unfortunately, the NASU translated every letter of every word of the quotation in capital letters elevating the common words to the level of the most Holy Name and presenting the quotations as superior to New Testament scripture.
Further, the NASU translators failed to render Kurios as LORD where passages allow for this translation, as in “the angel of the Lord,” (Matt 2:19) and ”I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,” (Matt 11:25). The NIV translators were no better. They consistently translated Kurios as “Lord” and I have not found an example in the NIV where the word is rendered as LORD. Even direct quotations from the Old Testament, referring to both the Father and the Son, do not make the appropriate distinction, as in, “The Lord said to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.’” (Matt 22:44). This is perplexing since the original passage in the NIV reads, “The LORD says to my Lord,” (Psa 110:1). Why was this passage not rendered in the New Testament as it is written in the Old Testament?
At best, the English translators are inconsistent in their rendering of Kurios. At worst, the translators are deliberately allowing their theological bias to affect their rending of scripture. Translating Kurios as “Lord” for both the Father and Son introduces a level of uncertainly into scripture and violates the pattern of Jesus who made a distinction between the Father and the Son, (Luke 18:19). A better rendering of Matthew 22:44 would be, “The LORD said to my Master…” At least the King James Version made an attempt to distinguish between the Father and Son by translating the passage as, “The LORD said unto my Lord.”
Always translating Kurios as “Lord,” making no distinction in the New Testament between the Father and Son, may be a veiled attempt by the translators to increase the reader’s perception of the diety of Jesus. However, the student of the Bible needs no such validation. He already appreciates that the balance of scripture is sufficient on its own merit to establish the relationship of Jesus and the LORD.
Are you sufficiently confused? It is not surprising and you are not alone. In passages that refer to God the Father, Kurios would be best rendered as “LORD,” while in references to Jesus, Kurios would be better rendered “Master,” as in “ Master, we worked hard all night and caught nothing, but I will do as You say and let down the nets,” (Luke 5:5). Each reader should understand this distinction to show ourselves “approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth,” (2 Tim 2:15).
In the Hebrew text, the most holy name of God is spelled YHWH. The Name is translated into English using all capital letters as “LORD.” When the Name was translated into the Greek Septuagint around 130 BC, the Hebrew authors chose the word “Kurios” for “LORD.” Since the New Testament Kurios was not YHVH, the King James translators rendered Kurios as “LORD” in only four passages: Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, and Acts 2:34. The NASU translators were a little better translating Kurios as LORD when the passage is a direct quotation from the Hebrew text. Unfortunately, the NASU translated every letter of every word of the quotation in capital letters elevating the common words to the level of the most Holy Name and presenting the quotations as superior to New Testament scripture.
Further, the NASU translators failed to render Kurios as LORD where passages allow for this translation, as in “the angel of the Lord,” (Matt 2:19) and ”I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,” (Matt 11:25). The NIV translators were no better. They consistently translated Kurios as “Lord” and I have not found an example in the NIV where the word is rendered as LORD. Even direct quotations from the Old Testament, referring to both the Father and the Son, do not make the appropriate distinction, as in, “The Lord said to my Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.’” (Matt 22:44). This is perplexing since the original passage in the NIV reads, “The LORD says to my Lord,” (Psa 110:1). Why was this passage not rendered in the New Testament as it is written in the Old Testament?
At best, the English translators are inconsistent in their rendering of Kurios. At worst, the translators are deliberately allowing their theological bias to affect their rending of scripture. Translating Kurios as “Lord” for both the Father and Son introduces a level of uncertainly into scripture and violates the pattern of Jesus who made a distinction between the Father and the Son, (Luke 18:19). A better rendering of Matthew 22:44 would be, “The LORD said to my Master…” At least the King James Version made an attempt to distinguish between the Father and Son by translating the passage as, “The LORD said unto my Lord.”
Always translating Kurios as “Lord,” making no distinction in the New Testament between the Father and Son, may be a veiled attempt by the translators to increase the reader’s perception of the diety of Jesus. However, the student of the Bible needs no such validation. He already appreciates that the balance of scripture is sufficient on its own merit to establish the relationship of Jesus and the LORD.
Are you sufficiently confused? It is not surprising and you are not alone. In passages that refer to God the Father, Kurios would be best rendered as “LORD,” while in references to Jesus, Kurios would be better rendered “Master,” as in “ Master, we worked hard all night and caught nothing, but I will do as You say and let down the nets,” (Luke 5:5). Each reader should understand this distinction to show ourselves “approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth,” (2 Tim 2:15).
Scott
No comments:
Post a Comment