LORD - PDF

LORD logos contrasts the giving of the law through Moses. that he speaks, he himself has been sent from God Affinities also exist with the wisdom traditions (Jn 3:34). Jesus is both the logos of God and the con- found p...

LORD logos contrasts the giving of the law through Moses. that he speaks, he himself has been sent from God Affinities also exist with the wisdom traditions (Jn 3:34). Jesus is both the logos of God and the con- found particularly in Proverbs 8; Sirach 24; Wisdom tent of his own words (Jn 14:24). He is both the rev- of Solomon 7—9, specifically wisdom’s tabernacling, elation of God and the revealer of that revelation glory and role in creation. (see Ashton), both the proclaimer and the pro- Both Philo’s interpretation of God’s logos and the claimed (Gundry, 49). However, because of the tab- memra in the Targumim reveal many intriguing ernacling of God’s logos, the logos of God is no lon- parallels with the Johannine logos. These parallels ger merely spoken and heard (see Dodd, 267). The imply that some sort of relationship between them message of the incarnation is that God’s audible lo- may be posited. However, it is difficult to argue for gos has become visible and has been revealed (Jn dependence either way between the Gospel of John, 1:14; 15:22, 24; cf. 1 Jn 1:1). Jesus’ opponents have nei- Philo’s exegesis and the memra of the Lord, espe- ther heard God’s phonē (“voice”) nor seen his eidos cially considering their most significant difference: (“form”), nor do they have his logos remaining in the incarnation of the Johannine logos. It is plausible them (Jn 5:37-38), but Jesus is the audible and visible that their similarities indicate that the description of logos of God, which can be heard and seen and can the logos in the prologue of John’s Gospel coheres remain in the believer. The Logos Christology of well with first-century a.d. Jewish interpretations of John’s Gospel emanates through the embodied logos the logos of God (see Evans, 144-45). The possibility of God and his words. exists that the author of the Gospel of John was See also Christology; Glory; Incarnation; aware of some of these understandings. Wisdom. BIBLIOGRAPHY. J. Ashton, Understanding the 4. Logos Christology in John’s Gospel. Fourth Gospel (2nd ed.; Oxford: Oxford University Scholars have previously argued for the existence of a Press, 2007); R. Bultmann, “The History of Reli- Logos hymn (Jn 1:1-18) that was joined to the begin- gions Background of the Prologue to the Gospel of ning of the Gospel of John (see Songs and Hymns). John,” in The Interpretation of John, ed. and trans. The verses John 1:6-8, 15 are seen as insertions into J. Ashton (London: SPCK, 1986 ); C. H. Dodd, the original hymn that served to relate the hymn The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: with the rest of this Gospel. As a result of this under- Cambridge University Press, 1953); C. A. Evans, standing of the Logos hymn, it has been generally Word and Glory: On the Exegetical and Theological considered that the Logos Christology of John 1:1-18 Background of John’s Prologue (JSNTSup 89; Shef- is nonexistent in the rest of John (see Bultmann). field: JSOT Press, 1993); R. H. Gundry, Jesus the R. Gundry has argued that in actuality there is a Word According to John the Sectarian: A Paleofunda- strong Logos Christology, which is discernible mentalist Manifesto for Contemporary Evangelical- throughout the Gospel of John (Gundry, 1-50). In ism, Especially Its Elites, in North America (Grand other words, there remains an emphasis on Jesus as Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); A. J. Köstenberger, John the logos beyond John 1:18. For instance, Jesus says (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004); that God’s word is truth (Jn 17:17), and yet he himself J. Painter, “Rereading Genesis in the Prologue of is the truth (Jn 14:6), implying that Jesus is the logos John?” Neotestamentica et Philonica: Studies in Honor (cf. Rev 19:11-13). In addition, to have God’s logos re- of Peder Borgen, ed. D. E. Aune, T. Seland and J. H. main in the believer is equivalent to having Jesus the Ulrichsen (NovTSup 106; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2003) logos remain in the believer (Jn 5:38; 8:31; cf. Jn 14:23; 179-201; J. Ronning, The Jewish Targums and John’s 1 Jn 1:10; 2:14) (Gundry, 22-23). The Logos Christol- Logos Theology (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2010); ogy is also noticeable in the concentration on Jesus’ M. Scott, Sophia and the Johannine Jesus (JSNTSup act of speaking. Jesus reveals himself to the Samari- 71; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992); T. H. Tobin, “The tan woman and the man born blind as ho lalōn (“the Prologue of John and Hellenistic Jewish Specula- one speaking” [Jn 4:26; 9:37]). His mother tells the tion,” CBQ 52 (1990) 252-69. B. E. Reynolds servants to do whatever Jesus legē (“tells”) them to do (Jn 2:5). When challenged about his teaching, Je- LORD sus says that he has spoken openly (Jn 18:19-20). The term kyrios (“Lord”), the central Christian con- Even the double *“Amen” sayings highlight Jesus’ fession regarding Jesus for the early church (cf. Rom words (Gundry, 9-10). 10:9; 1 Cor 12:3; Phil 2:11), had a wide variety of uses Everything that Jesus speaks he has heard from in antiquity. It is necessary to explore some of these the Father (Jn 8:28, 38; 12:49-50), and like the words before examining how and whether Jesus, the earli- 526 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 526 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD est Christians and then the evangelists used this indicate their relationship to Jesus “the Lord” (Rom term or its Aramaic equivalent to say something es- 1:1). The doulos who served a kyrios was not free but sential or even extraordinary about the central fig- rather was the property of his or her Lord. This was ure of the Christian faith. the normal terminology in various Eastern reli- 1. Greek Usage gions to express the relationship of the adherent to 2. Jewish Background the deity. No doubt to a significant degree this us- 3. The Origin of Christian Kyrios Usage age was derived from the more ordinary usage in 4. Jesus as Kyrios the institution of slavery (see Slave, Servant). The 5. Kyrios in the Gospels term kyrios had a perfectly normal, nonreligious 6. Kyrios in Acts sense in both classical and Koine Greek, meaning 7. Conclusion “master” or “owner” of some property (including human property). 1. Greek Usage. The vocative form kyrie frequently was just a po- The term kyrios was used both in religious and secu- lite form of address like the English term “sir.” This lar contexts in the NT era. Both national and mys- latter usage is evident not only in secular Greek lit- tery religions, especially in the East (i.e., Egypt, erature but also in the NT (e.g., Mk 7:28; Jn 12:21). It Syria, Asia Minor, but also in Greece and elsewhere), is likely, however, that the use of mārî, the Aramaic frequently used the term kyrios or its female equiva- equivalent of kyrie, was, at least in the context of Je- lent, kyria, to refer to gods and goddesses such as sus’ inner circle of disciples, already taking on a Isis, Sarapis or Osiris (see Gods, Greek and Roman). deeper significance than a mere respectful form of It is quite clear in these contexts that the term kyrios address (see Vermes, 109-15). connotes a deity who can answer prayers and de- From these examples we can readily observe the serves thanks for divine help. This development scope of usage of the term kyrios in Greek literature. seems to go beyond the use of kyrios in the period of On the one hand, it can have a perfectly mundane classical Greek, when the term referred to the great use, referring to the master or owner of slaves or power a god had over a person or group of persons some other sort of property, such as a household or but did not yet seem to have been a divine title (cf. business. The term in the vocative could also be used Pindar, Isthm. 5.53; Plato, Leg. 12.13). as a respectful way of addressing a person, in particu- Equally important for our purposes is the fact lar a superior, who was not one’s owner or employer. that the Roman emperor was, as early as the time of This second sort of usage had become so conven- Nero, called kyrios with the sense of divinity (see tional that it often meant little more than our own Rome). Yet even though he was divinized, he was use of the address “Dear Sir” in a letter. Yet early in also known to be a human being. For instance, an the first century b.c., at least in the eastern part of the ostracon dated August 4, a.d. 63, reads, “In the year empire, the term kyrios, in the sense of divinity, was nine of Nero the Lord [tou kyriou].... ” Even before being applied not only to mythological gods, such as this time, however, in the eastern part of the empire Sarapis or Osiris, but also to one particular human and in Egypt in particular the emperor was being being, the Roman emperor. In such a context it is un- called kyrios in a more than merely human sense. derstandable why Paul might say that there are many Thus, for instance, Oxyrhynchus papyrus 1143, which so-called gods and lords, yet for Christians there is dates to a.d. 1, speaks of sacrifices and libations “for but one Lord, Jesus Christ (1 Cor 8:5-6). Because of the God and Lord Emperor [Augustus].” Even from the use of kyrios in these more religious senses, 12 b.c. we have an inscription to Augustus as theos kai W. Bousset argued that it was not until Christianity kyrios, “God and Lord” (BGU 1197, I, 15). reached a mainly Greek or Hellenistic environment As A. Deissmann long ago argued, it is quite that the title “Lord” was applied to Jesus, and then likely that the early church deliberately and polem- under the influence of pagan usage. This conclusion ically ascribed to Jesus titles that had already been can be shown to be incorrect by a study of the Jewish applied to the emperor (Deissmann, 349-51). The usage of kyrios and its Aramaic cognate. meaning of the term within the Pauline communi- ties—an absolute divine being to whom one be- 2. Jewish Background. longs and owes absolute allegiance and submis- In the Septuagint (lxx) the term kyrios occurs over sion—becomes all the more evident in light of the nine thousand times, and in some 6,156 occurrences Pauline language of self-reference. Paul speaks of it is used in place of the proper name of God, “Yah- himself and others as douloi (“slaves”) in order to weh.” This amounts not to a translation of the per- 527 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 527 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD sonal name Yahweh but to a circumlocution meant from the temple discovered at Gaza, called the Mar- to aid in avoiding saying the sacred Tetragramma- neum, where a god called mār was worshiped (John- ton. There are, however, some doubts as to whether son, 151). the original compilers of the lxx actually in every L. Hurtado has amassed material demonstrating case translated the Tetragrammaton with kyrios. the complex nature of early Jewish thought on such Some older manuscripts have the Hebrew YHWH in subjects as divine agents (Hurtado 1998). He has the Greek text in some places, and at least one lxx shown that there is plenty of evidence that in early manuscript from Qumran uses IAO for the Tetra- Judaism the Jewish concept of the uniqueness of grammaton instead of kyrios. The copies of the lxx God could coexist with the idea that God could give that do have kyrios for YHWH date from the fourth a unique place and role to a particular heavenly fig- century a.d. on and appear to be Christian copies ure or agent. This included the idea that exalted pa- with Christian modifications. Yet J. Fitzmyer has triarchs (e.g., Enoch or Moses) and principal *angels produced evidence that early Jews did use the Greek (e.g., Michael) could speak and act for God with di- kyrios as well as ’ādôn or mārē’ of Yahweh, and thus vine *authority and power. This evidence is signifi- it is not impossible that early Jewish Christians cant because it indicates a larger context of divine transferred such a title from Yahweh to Jesus agency in early Judaism by which even the first Jew- (Fitzmyer 1979; 1998). But we can no longer say with ish Christians could have understood Jesus. any assurance that this was done under the influence of the lxx. When in the lxx and other early Jewish 3. The Origin of Christian Kyrios Usage. literature kyrios is used to translate the Hebrew word Aramaic evidence of singular importance for this ’ādôn, it is a matter of translation and not a circum- study can be found in 1 Corinthians 16:22 and in locution. Some 190 times in the lxx ’ādôn is trans- what is probably the earliest of extracanonical Chris- lated as kyrios and refers to those who were lords or tian works, the Didache (see Did. 10:6). Here Jesus is commanders in some sense. referred to as Lord by the earliest Aramaic-speaking Examples of kyrios used of Yahweh can be found Christians using the phrase maran atha, or more not only in Josephus and Philo but even as early as likely marana tha (cf. Rev 22:20, which is likely a the Wisdom of Solomon (some 27x; see Wis 1:1, 7, 9; Greek translation of this phrase; this last text makes 2:13). In fact, there is also some evidence that it clear that it is Jesus who is in view, as is also evi- ’ădōnāy was being used as a substitute for YHWH in dent in 1 Cor 16:22-23). There are three ways the some cases at Qumran in their Hebrew biblical phrase marana tha could be rendered: (1) “Lord, manuscripts. Equally interesting is the use of come”; (2) “Our Lord has come”; or (3) even as a ’ădōnāy in prayers of invocation at Qumran (cf. prophetic perfect, “The Lord will come.” Whichever 1QM XII, 8, 18; 1Q 34). rendering one chooses (especially in view of Rev The Aramaic word for “lord” is mār, which is al- 22:20, the first of the three seems most likely), a most always found with various suffixes. The use of person who has died is being referred to as Lord. mārē’ or mārā’ to refer to God as Lord can be traced Since the first translation is the most probable, back at least as early as Daniel 2:47; 5:23, even though C. F. D. Moule’s pointed remark is significant: “Be- in these texts the term is not yet used in an absolute sides even if ‘our Lord’ is not the same as ‘the Lord’ sense as a title. Evidence of a different sort can be absolutely, and even if the Aramaic mārē had been found in the Genesis Apocryphon (1QapGen). This used mostly for humans and not for God (which we Qumran document probably dates from about the have seen reason to question) one does not call upon turn of the era and has examples of God being ad- a mere Rabbi, after his death, to come. The entire dressed in Aramaic as mārî, “my Lord.” This is the phrase, Maranatha, if it meant ‘Come, our Master!’ only known example of this usage in Aramaic. How- would be bound to carry transcendental overtones ever, it is quite common to find the more mundane even if the maran by itself did not” (Moule, 41). use of mārî by a wife or servant of the husband or It is not completely clear whether maranatha was head of the household. In Targum of Job (11Q10) we used to invoke Christ’s presence in worship or was a have mārē’ as a rendering of the Hebrew word wishful prayer for the return of Christ from heaven. šadday (“almighty”). There is also a fragment from Nevertheless, on the basis of strong evidence that Cave 4 from the Enoch literature where mārē’ is used the Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christians, during and of God (4Qenc ar 4; cf. 1 Enoch 89:31-36), and the likely before Paul’s time (i.e., the earliest Jewish Greek version has ho kyrios in related passages (1 Christians), called Jesus “Lord,” or at least “our Enoch 89:42, 45). Further important evidence comes Lord,” we must reject Bousset’s argument for the ori- 528 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 528 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD gin of the christological title kyrios in the Hellenistic ministry, but also probably was addressed by the mission of the early church. term of respect mārē’, which would have connoted It is striking that Paul, writing in the 50s to that Jesus was a great teacher who exercised author- Greek-speaking Christians who very likely did not ity over his disciples. The disciples looked to Jesus as know Aramaic, does not bother to translate mara- master in that sense. Another piece of evidence that natha. This surely must mean that he assumes that may support this line of reasoning is the use of they understood the meaning of the phrase, which “slave/master” language (Jn 15:15, 20) in referring to in turn suggests that it had long been a common in- the relationship between Jesus and his disciples. vocation used by Christians, originating from Ju- A much more crucial passage for this discussion dean Christianity, and especially the Jerusalem is Mark 12:35-37. Here Psalm 110:1 is quoted: “The church (Hurtado 2003, 174-75). Consequently, the Lord said to my lord, ‘Sit at my right hand.’” Jesus apostle sees no need to explain or translate it. The then asks, “David himself calls him Lord; so how is origin of the Christian use of the term “Lord” for he his son?” This text should not be abruptly dis- Jesus must be traced at least back to the earliest missed as reflecting the later theology of the early Aramaic-speaking Jewish Christians. Can it be church, especially inasmuch as there is extensive traced back even further? evidence that Jesus saw himself in messianic terms and at least indirectly made messianic claims (see 4. Jesus as Kyrios. Witherington 1990). Indeed, Mark 12:35-37 reflects Several texts seem to go back to a historical setting precisely the sort of allusive, or indirect, manner Je- during the lifetime of Jesus. They raise the question sus seems to have used in public to indicate how he of whether and in what sense Jesus may have been viewed himself. His method was to allude to his sig- called “Lord” during his earthly ministry. We have nificance in such a way as to lure his audience into already dealt with texts in which the vocative kyrie careful and deep reflection on this important matter. was used, and we will not return to them here, as The form of teaching here is characteristic of early they probably offer little help (with some possible Jewish teachers. Taking a puzzling text, they would exceptions in the Fourth Gospel [see 5.4 below]). Of raise questions about it in such a way as to challenge more importance may be texts such as Mark 11:3, common misconceptions, in this case the nature of where Jesus tells his disciples to go and get him a colt the Messiah (see Christ) as the *son of David. to ride into *Jerusalem and to tell anyone who ques- Also favoring the authenticity of this tradition is tions their action, “The Lord has need of it.” The the fact that it seems to suggest that Jesus challenges Greek reads ho kyrios, and presumably, if this goes the idea that Messiah must be of Davidic origin, a back to an actual command of Jesus, it is a rendering fact that the early church went to some lengths to of the Aramaic mārē’ (see Languages of Palestine). demonstrate (e.g., Mt 1:1-20; Lk 1:27; 3:23-38). In the The meaning here is much like what we find in Mark text as it stands, Jesus is suggesting that the Messiah 14:14, where Jesus is reported to have said, “The is David’s Lord, and as such he stands above and ex- teacher asks, Where is my guest room?” If so, then ists prior to David. This is why Jesus raises the ques- “Lord” here may be no more than a respectful way of tion of why the scribes call Messiah “David’s son.” referring to a master teacher, just as we might speak The idea of preexistence was commonly predicated of a master craftsman. It does suggest one who sees of God’s divine agents in early Judaism (Hurtado himself as having authority to command or requisi- 1998, 13). tion things of people, whether they are disciples or It is, then, not inconceivable that Jesus here could not. It is not clear whether this particular usage of have alluded to himself not only as Messiah but even mārē’ bears more significance than this. as preexistent Lord and been understood by his au- Support for this can be found in several places in dience (Taylor, 492-93). This means that ultimately the Fourth Gospel, where we find the two terms the proclamation of Jesus as Lord goes back to “teacher” and “lord” are juxtaposed (Jn 13:13-16). We something that Jesus suggested about himself, albeit should also note that in the resurrection account of obliquely, during his ministry and in public. Yet this John 20 we find Mary Magdalene calling her de- does not explain when and at what point Jesus’ fol- ceased teacher “my Lord” (Jn 20:13), and when she lowers took the hint and really began to see Jesus in actually recognizes the voice of Jesus speaking to this light. We have noted that the evidence is at best her, she cries “Rabbouni” (Jn 20:16), which is trans- scant that during his ministry Jesus’ disciples lated “Teacher.” This text also seems to suggest that thought of him as mārē’ in any sort of transcendent Jesus not only was called rabbî or rabbûnî during his sense (Lk 6:46 may suggest this; see also Johannine 529 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 529 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD exceptions discussed below). What, then, prompted of Jesus as Lord seems to go back to something that the confession of Jesus as Lord? Here we may con- Jesus alluded to during his ministry, the formal sider clues from several sources. point of departure for such a confession by the dis- First, there is the primitive confessional material ciples was their encounters with the risen Lord on that Paul uses in Romans 1:3-4. This text certainly the day of and after the resurrection, as well as their suggests that Jesus assumed new functions, author- reception of the Holy Spirit. As best we can tell, the ity and power as a result of his resurrection. Indeed, first to so confess Jesus seems to have been the per- he was given the new title “Son of God in power” as son who first claimed to have seen Jesus risen: Mary a result of the resurrection. Another piece of evi- Magdalene. In light of the negative view regarding a dence comes from what is probably a christological woman’s word of witness that existed in many places, hymn that Paul quotes in Philippians 2:6-11. Here we but especially in Palestine, in the first century a.d. are told that because of Jesus’ giving up of the status (see Witherington 1984), it is not credible that the and prerogatives of “being equal to God” and taking early church invented the idea that Mary Magdalene on of the form not merely of a human being but of a was the first to claim, “I have seen the Lord.” Indeed, slave, being obedient to God’s plan even to the point the early witness list in 1 Corinthians 15:5-8 is indica- of death, he has now been highly exalted and given tive of the tendency in the early church to move in the name that is above all names. Jesus moves from quite the opposite direction and claim the promi- being a doulos to the kyrios. In the context of the nence of the Twelve and the apostles as *witnesses of hymn, that name which is above all others is not “Je- the resurrection. sus,” a name that he already had, but rather the We find further evidence that the experience of throne name that he acquired when he assumed the the risen Lord led to the full confession of Jesus’ sig- functions of deity, ruling over all things. This name nificance in John 20:28, where the climactic confes- is kyrios. Acts 2:36, which may reflect some of the sion in a Gospel full of confessions is ho kyrios mou early apostolic preaching, says, “Let all the house of kai ho theos mou (“My Lord and my God”). It may be Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made that this material is included here because the evan- him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you cru- gelist, writing toward the close of the first century, cified.” In view of the fact that Luke readily calls Je- knew of the emperor Domitian’s (a.d. 81–96) prac- sus kyrios in his Gospel, it is most unlikely that he tice of naming himself dominus et deus noster (“our would have created a text such as this, which sug- Lord and God”) in official correspondence (Sueto- gests, if not states, that lordship is most appropri- nius Dom. 13.2). The Fourth Evangelist may have ately predicated of Jesus after his death. But what been countering such a claim. But even if this is so, it does it mean that God “has made” Jesus kyrios? seems rather clear that John wishes to convey to his E. Franklin argued that for Luke the decisive escha- audience that the true confession of Jesus first came tological event was the ascension of Jesus, through about as a result of seeing the risen Lord, in the cases which his universal sovereignty was actualized and of both Mary Magdalene and Thomas. Christologi- publicly recognized (Franklin, 53-54). Whether or cal convictions and confessions were first generated not one agrees with Franklin’s thesis that the ascen- by the experience of the risen Lord and his Spirit, sion (not resurrection) was the moment of Jesus’ not by an influence from Greco-Roman religions glorification (Franklin, 30), he is correct that there is (see Hurtado 1988, 121; cf. Hurtado 2003, 64-74). both continuity and discontinuity between Jesus’ This leads us to examine how the term kyrios came identity as kyrios before and after his exaltation. to be used by the evangelists, who likely were com- Another hint comes from John 20:18, which sug- posing their Gospels during the last third of the first gests that the earliest post-Easter proclamation of century a.d. faith was “I have seen the [risen] Lord.” In short, the evidence suggests that the confession “Jesus is Lord” 5. Kyrios in the Gospels. arose as a result of the earliest disciples’ experiences The Synoptic Gospels, and Luke in particular, in- with the risen Christ (see Resurrection). Indeed, clude nearly the whole range of uses of the term Paul suggests that such a confession could not arise kyrios as have been discussed here. There are some until after the Lord had risen and the Spirit (see Holy 717 passages where the term kyrios occurs in the NT, Spirit) had descended on Jesus’ followers, for he and 210 of them can be found in Luke-Acts (another says, “No one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except by the 275 are found in Paul’s writings). The fact that the Holy Spirit” (1 Cor 12:3). majority of uses of kyrios are found in the writings of Although the ultimate ground for the confession Luke and Paul may be explained by the fact that they 530 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 530 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD were mainly addressing Gentile audiences, or at dress Jesus in this manner. Although this may be the least they were writing to people in areas where the case in the original historical situation during Jesus’ Greek language and culture were the predominant earthly ministry, when read in a Gospel narrative, influences. In contrast to Luke, kyrios occurs only 18 the address kyrie could attain additional signifi- times in Mark and 80 times in Matthew, while there cance, especially in the Gospels of Matthew and are 52 instances in the Fourth Gospel. Luke. With respect to Luke’s Gospel, C. Rowe con- 5.1. Kyrios in the Synoptics. A sampling of the vincingly argues that individual occurrences of the various uses not referring to Jesus can now be word kyrie must not be examined in isolation from given. In Mark and the Q material God is never the entire narrative context, which was written called kyrios except in Mark 5:19; 13:20, but both from a postresurrection perspective. Even though Matthew and Luke (especially in the birth narra- from the perspective of the narrative characters Je- tives) call God kyrios (cf. Mt 1:20, 22, 24; 2:13, 15, 19 sus is no more than a “sir” or “master,” the evange- with Lk 1:6, 9, 11, 15, 17, 25, 28, 38, 45, 58, 66; 2:9, 15, lists and their readers know that he is much more 22, 23, 24, 26, 39). We also find kyrios used of God than that. Using the literary device of narrative in the resurrection material in Matthew 28:2 and in irony, Luke makes use of the ambivalence of the two instances unique to Luke: Luke 5:17; 20:37. Ky- word kyrie to characterize Jesus in his Gospel. For rie as a conventional address of respect is always Luke, kyrie “is thus both christologically ‘Lord’ and used in the Gospels whenever a slave speaks to a historically ‘sir/master’” (Rowe 2006, 216). master. However, it can also be found on the lips of 5.2. Kyrios in Luke. Regarding the absolute use Jews addressing Pilate (Mt 27:63) (see Pontius Pi- of the noun kyrios, Matthew and Mark do not use late), of workers speaking to the owner of a vine- the term in a transcendent sense within their narra- yard (Lk 13:8), of a son to his father when he works tive frameworks of the sayings of Jesus (Mk 11:3 is for him (Mt 21:30), of Greeks addressing Philip (Jn probably not an exception). Luke, on the other hand, 12:21), and of Mary to the gardener (unknowingly does employ such usage. For instance, in Luke 7:13 addressing Jesus) (Jn 20:15). we read, “And the Lord [ho kyrios] had compassion Kyrios can be used to refer to the lord or owner of on her.” Or in Luke 10:1 the evangelist writes, “And some property or estate, such as the owner of a vine- the Lord [ho kyrios] appointed seventy others.” Luke, yard (Mk 12:9 par.). We have already noted that as a Gentile writing exclusively to a Gentile audi- Mark 11:3 and its parallels likely reflect the same sort ence, shows no reticence in using ho kyrios of Jesus, of usage. The term can also be used either of the thereby implying the transcendent religious sense of master of a (free) steward (Lk 16:3) or of an owner of the term. This is not to say that Luke is being totally slaves (almost always with a qualifier like “his” or anachronistic, for he usually is careful not to place “my” [cf. Mt 18:25; 24:45; Lk 12:37, 42; 14:23]). But we the term on Jesus’ own lips or those of his interlocu- do not find the Gospels using kyrios either for the tors in a manner uncharacteristic of Jesus’ ministry. emperor or for any pagan deities, although the verbs Some probable exceptions are found in Luke 1:43, kyrieuō (Lk 22:25) and katakyrieuō (Mk 10:42; Mt where Elizabeth speaks of Mary as “the mother of 20:25) are used of Gentile rulers. my Lord”; Luke 2:11, where Jesus is identified as There are, however, some examples where kyrios “Lord” to the shepherds (but in this case the speaker seems to refer to the ability and right to exercise au- is an angel); and Luke 1:38, where Mary is called “the thority and power. In these cases it amounts to a servant of the Lord,” though here kyrios seems to re- nontitular use without any transcendent implica- fer to Yahweh. tions. For instance, in Mark 2:28, when Jesus says Numerous other references in Luke’s Gospel in- that the *Son of Man is “lord of the Sabbath,” he dicate the evangelist’s regular use of kyrios within means that he is one who exercises authority over the narrative framework of his account of Jesus’ the rules that govern the Sabbath. Of a similar na- ministry (cf. Lk 7:19; 10:1, 39, 41; 11:39; 12:42; 16:8; ture is the nontitular use in Luke 10:2, where God is 17:5, 6; 18:6; 19:8a; 22:61; 24:3, 34). When he is speak- said to be the one who controls the harvest; he is “the ing of Jesus, Luke is not reluctant to use the Chris- lord of the harvest.” tian title “Lord.” The implication may be that Luke is Before we examine individual Gospels, a word of suggesting that at least in being, if not yet fully in caution is necessary concerning the use of the voca- action or recognition, Jesus was already the kyrios. tive kyrie in the Gospel narratives. The vocative There is some justification then for H. Conzelmann’s form of the word could be simply used as a respect- claim that for Luke, Jesus is first of all the kyrios who ful address, and many characters in the Gospels ad- was given dominion by God and rules over the 531 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 531 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD Christian community by means of the Spirit (Con- in Matthew 7:21-22; 25:37, 44; (2) the use of “your zelmann, 176-79). Lord” in Matthew 24:42; and (3) the use of “my Rowe argues that for Luke, the title kyrios is of Lord” in the citation of Psalm 110:1 in Matthew crucial importance for the identity of Jesus. On the 22:44. Kingsbury has shown, however, that kyrios is one hand, Jesus is inseparably bound with God as not Matthew’s premier title for Jesus. When it does they share in identity as kyrios, although Rowe is bear christological weight, it usually is explained or careful to describe this identity as a bound, not qualified by another title, and thus at most it should mixed, one. On the other hand, Jesus’ identity as be regarded as an auxiliary christological title in kyrios guarantees the continuity of his earthly and Matthew’s Gospel. There is also a certain allusive or heavenly ministries (Rowe 2006, 27). indirect character in some of the christological pas- 5.3. Kyrios in Matthew. In Matthew’s Gospel sages (cf. Mt 3:3; 22:44). strangers, enemies and Judas Iscariot never refer to 5.4. Kyrios in John. John’s christological use of Jesus as kyrie, but rather always greet Jesus with di- kyrios is scant compared to Luke’s, yet more evident daskale or rabbi. Alternately, the disciples and those than Matthew’s. The titles “Son,” “Son of God” and who seek out Jesus for healing always address Jesus “Messiah/Christ” occur in John more frequently as kyrie (Kingsbury 1989). While it is possible that than “Lord.” This may seem surprising, given the J. Kingsbury has made too much of Matthew’s use of likelihood that John is the latest of the canonical the vocative kyrie, there is justification for under- Gospels, written well after the confession “Jesus is standing Matthew’s narrative use of the vocative ky- Lord” would have been established in the church. rie spoken of Jesus as infused with greater christo- Although the address of the paralytic (vocative, ky- logical import (as in Luke [see 5.2 above]). rie) in John 5:7 should not be counted as having In fact, Matthew as narrator is not shy about us- christological weight, the reference to Jesus as “the ing kyrios of Jesus. For example, in Matthew 3:3 (fol- Lord” in John 6:23 is a christological usage (if the few lowing Mk 1:3) he quotes Isaiah 40:3 (“prepare the Western manuscripts [D, 091, arm et al.] that omit way of the Lord”) and implicitly applies to Jesus a the relevant phrase are not followed). title originally referring to Yahweh. This reference, Peter’s address to Jesus, “Lord [kyrie], to whom however, only becomes evident from what follows in shall we go?” in John 6:68 may be intended as more the narrative, not from the quotation itself. Matthew than a respectful form of address, especially in view 7:21-22 provides another case where kyrie is attrib- of Peter’s confession in John 6:69. A christological uted to Jesus, this time with Jesus referring to him- meaning is possible but not as likely in the address- self as “Lord” (vocative), with a sense of his right to ing of Jesus as kyrie by the woman caught in adultery receive allegiance. (Jn 8:11), though this pericope was probably not There is a notable stress on the lordship of Jesus originally part of this Gospel. as Matthew’s Gospel works to its climax. Thus, for A very interesting case is the healed blind man in instance, in Matthew 22:44 Jesus is clearly implied to John 9, where the different nuances of the vocative be Lord, and in Matthew 24:42 Jesus refers to him- kyrie are appropriately reflected in several transla- self as “your Lord” (note the parallel with Son of tions (e.g., niv, nrsv). Having asked by Jesus about Man in Mt 24:39). Additionally, Jesus’ final teaching the identity of the Son of Man, his initial address to in Matthew includes reference to Jesus as “Lord” Jesus in John 9:36, “Who is he, sir [kyrie]?” is clearly (vocative, kyrie [Mt 25:37, 44]) by those on his right a respectful form of address. After Jesus revealed his and left in a final judgment scenario, in analogous identity as the Son of Man, however, the man re- fashion to the saying in Matthew 7:21-22. sponds to him as such, “Lord [kyrie], I believe,” and Kingsbury offers some helpful conclusions about worships him (Jn 9:38). the use of kyrios in Matthew, particularly his obser- In John 11, the editorial comment in John 11:2 vation that the word is most often used in Matthew provides us with a clear Christian use of ho kyrios. as a relational term—the master as opposed to the Also, Martha’s address to Jesus in John 11:27, uttered slave, the owner as opposed to the worker, even the together with a christological confession, is probably father as opposed to the son (Mt 21:28-30) (Kings- more than a respectful way of addressing her teacher, bury 1975). However, none of these examples come but the other uses of kyrie in the chapter (Jn 11:3, 12, from passages of christological significance. Yet it is 21, 32, 34, 39) could be rendered as “sir.” But even telling that in the christological passages that we here ambiguity remains: the presence of the christo- have examined the relational character of the term is logical use of kyrios in John 11:2, 27 may force John’s indicated by (1) the use of the vocative “Lord, Lord” readers to see more than a respectful address to a 532 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 532 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD great teacher in this narrative. kyrios even before the resurrection, but the decisive The blessing at the *triumphal entry in John 12:13 epistemological shift on the disciples’ part took (citing Ps 118:25-26) likely refers to God, not Jesus, as place only when they encountered the risen Lord kyrios. John 12:38, citing Isaiah 53:1, should likely (Rowe 2006, 229). also be seen in this way. Peter’s address of “Lord” in John 13:6, 9, in the narrative of Jesus’ washing the 6. Kyrios in Acts. disciples’ feet, may have some christological impli- Not surprisingly, the use of kyrios in Acts reflects the cations in light of Peter’s earlier use of the term in same sort of phenomena found in Luke’s Gospel. John 6:68-69. But we should not discount the possi- The term appears frequently and is used in a variety bility that kyrie here is used as a term of respect for of ways. Since Acts reflects the period of time after one’s teacher. The same can be said of Peter’s words the resurrection of Jesus, it is hardly surprising that in John 13:36-37 and Thomas’s address of Jesus in the confessional use of the term is even more evident John 14:5. here than in the Gospel. Thus, for instance, Acts 1:21 It may be of some significance that in the Fourth provides us with the first juxtaposition of the abso- Gospel (1) Jesus does not call himself kyrios in the lute form of “Lord” with the name “Jesus” (ho kyrios clearly transcendent sense; (2) the evangelist clearly Iēsous), a phenomenon that occurs regularly in the does call Jesus kyrios in his editorial remarks and Pauline Epistles (cf. also Acts 15:11; 20:35). Also, at within the narrative framework (although there are the very beginning of the book the risen Jesus is ad- only three instances of this prior to the resurrection dressed in prayer as kyrios (Acts 1:24; cf. Acts 7:59- [Jn 4:1; 6:23; 11:2], only the last of which is free of 60). We also find OT passages referring to Yahweh textual problems); (3) up until John 20, whenever as Lord now being applied to Jesus (Acts 2:25, using the term is found on a disciple’s lips, it is always in Ps 16:8-11). the vocative, and few of these instances are clearly Acts 2:36 has already been referred to, but note christological. It is important to note that when a that in Acts 2:34-35 there is yet another use of Psalm narrative character uses kyrie in a christological 110:1 referring to Jesus, this time by Peter. manner, it is in his or her confession of faith in re- J. D. G. Dunn argued that this text played a crucial sponse to Jesus’ self-revelation as a transcendent be- role in the Christology of the earliest Christian com- ing (Jn 9:38; 11:27). The words of Mary Magdalene in munity in Jerusalem: Psalm 110:1 brought home to John 20:13 (“my Lord”), which are not cast in the the earliest Christians the importance not only of absolute form, are the first nonvocative use of kyrios the resurrection but also of the exaltation of Jesus by a character within the narrative, and even here (Dunn, 218-19). The title kyrios for Jesus as the ex- they may not bear christological meaning. alted one “carried with it overtones of authority, On the other hand, John 20:18; 20:28; 21:7, and mastery and supremacy” that required absolute sub- possibly the multiple examples of the vocative in mission (Dunn, 219). According to Dunn, however, 21:15-21, are clearly instances where a character in the fully divine Christology was only a later develop- the narrative calls Jesus kyrios in the transcendent ment of this “somewhat unreflective use of Ps. 110.1 sense. John repeatedly narrates how the disciples in reference to Jesus as the second Lord installed by “saw” ho kyrios (Jn 20:18, 20, 25), which leads to the Lord God at his right hand” (Dunn, 221). Other Thomas’s climactic christological confession in John scholars disagree. Noting the fact that this psalm 20:28, “My Lord [ho kyrios mou] and my God!” was never applied in Second Temple Judaism to the where kyrios and God are unambiguously juxta- Messiah or to any of the exalted heavenly figures, posed. This strongly suggests that the Fourth Evan- R. Bauckham argued that “the exaltation of Jesus to gelist is consciously trying to avoid anachronism in the heavenly throne of God could only mean, for the his use of this title and wishes to indicate that Jesus early Christians who were Jewish monotheists, his was only truly known and confessed to be Lord as a inclusion in the unique identity of God” (Bauck- result of the disciples’ encounters with the risen ham, 23; see also 173-76). Hurtado also doubted that Lord. However, in John the line between preresur- this Acts narrative misrepresents the devotion of rection and postresurrection periods is not rigid, as early Judean believers to Jesus as kyrios, concluding even during Jesus’ earthly ministry some people that at the very least Jesus’ lordship acquired a heav- could recognize Jesus’ identity as Lord, when Jesus enly, transcendent dimension in the early develop- chose to reveal himself to them as such. ment of the movement (Hurtado 2003, 180-81). Fur- In any case, Luke and John clearly share the basic thermore, Hurtado argued that in the practice of the understanding of Jesus’ identity as kyrios: Jesus was cultic invocation of Jesus as kyrios, reflected in Acts 533 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 533 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LORD 2:21, the title clearly functions as a divine title, and Acts in a way that is not true of the Gospels, even that this practice goes back to the earliest stage of Luke’s. The use of the phrase “the Lord” continued to Judean Christianity (Hurtado 2003, 182). To these be Luke’s favorite designation for Jesus in his narra- may be added an observation by N. T. Wright: “The tive material (see, e.g., Acts 11:21, 23, 24; 15:35, 40). high Christology to which [the early Christians] were committed from extremely early on—a belief 7. Conclusion. in Jesus as somehow divine, but firmly within the A somewhat clear development of the use of the framework of Jewish monotheism—was not a pa- term kyrios for Jesus of Nazareth can now be traced. ganization of Jewish life and thought, but, at least in The usage begins with indirect hints during the time intention, an exploration of its inner heart” (Wright, of Jesus’ ministry, through accounts of encounters 577). Thus, we can conclude that from the very be- with the risen Lord, to the use of maranatha in early ginning the Christian movement regarded Jesus as Palestinian Jewish-Christian contexts, to evidence the exalted, heavenly kyrios. of the christological use of the term in the narrative Another important passage is Acts 10:36. Here framework of Luke and John, and finally to the var- Peter explains to Cornelius, the first Gentile convert, iegated use of the term in Acts. In Acts it is used in the universal lordship of Jesus: “Jesus Christ, who is combination with the name “Jesus” and the title Lord of all [houtos estin pantōn kyrios].” Here, two “Christ,” as a form of address to the exalted Christ, things need mention. First, the universal lordship of and in the transfer of reference from Yahweh to Jesus Jesus is presented against the lordship claim of the in quotes from the OT. Roman emperor, who is also called “the lord” (ho Interestingly, we do not find the use of the abso- kyrios) by the governor Porcius Festus (Acts 25:26). lute or transcendent kyrios in the narrative frame- Rowe pointed out the importance of the word houtos works of Matthew and Mark, and there is some at- in Acts 10:36 and argued that Luke’s implication is tempt by both Luke and, to a lesser degree, John to that “this one—and not someone else—is the kyrios avoid anachronism by not placing the full Christian of all” (Rowe 2005, 291). The two kinds of lordship use of the term on narrative characters’ lips during are not necessarily incompatible with each other, as the ministry of Jesus. It is also significant that Luke- long as the emperor is content with a subordinate Acts and John intimate that the confession of Jesus status as merely a lord under Jesus, who is the “Lord as Lord decisively arose as a result of the resurrec- of lords” (Pinter, 114). At least for Luke, however, the tion experiences. This, of course, did not prevent the emperor is not content to be subordinate, as Luke evangelists from sometimes calling the Jesus of the presents Caesar Augustus as exercising dominion ministry “Lord” in their narratives, for it was “this over the whole world (oikoumenē) (Lk 2:1). same Jesus” (Acts 1:11) whom God had raised from Second, the universal lordship of Jesus provides a the dead who took on the tasks of Lord in earnest theological basis for the faith community that con- when he joined God in heaven. In other words, the sists of both Jews and Gentiles, and thus for Gentile continuity of the usage of kyrios from before and af- missions. “The Lordship of the Christ initiates a ter the death and resurrection in the Gospels reflects community of salvation” (Rowe 2009, 124), and this the belief in the continuity of personhood between salvation is available to all precisely because Jesus is the historical Jesus (see Quest of the Historical Jesus) the Lord of all. and the risen Lord. One might also note that in Acts 17:24 Paul calls The title kyrios for Jesus also has an ecclesiologi- God “kyrios of heaven and earth.” In light of the cal significance. Since the term kyrios presupposes shared identity of Jesus and God as kyrios in Luke’s the relationship between the “lord/master” and Gospel, the universal lordship of Jesus and that of those under the lordship of the former, the recogni- God are not contradictory but complementary: tion of Jesus as ho kyrios inevitably leads to the iden- “God’s universal Lordship is expressed in the Lord- tity of the community of those who recognize Jesus ship of Jesus Christ” (Rowe 2009, 112). In fact, just as such (Thompson, 103), regardless of their ethnic prior to Peter’s declaration that Jesus is the Lord of origins. Thus, the “people of God” is no longer de- all, Cornelius says to him, “Now we are all here in fined by the traditional notion of ethnic Israel the presence of God to listen to everything the Lord (Yamazaki-Ransom, 3). This common allegiance to [ho kyrios] has commanded you to tell us” (Acts the lordship of Jesus sometimes conflicts with the 10:33), in which ho kyrios most likely refers to God. Roman emperor’s claim to lordship. As we have These examples are sufficient to show that the seen, this is evident in Acts, but even in Luke’s Gos- full range of early Christian uses of kyrios is found in pel the newly born Jesus is proclaimed by angels as 534 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 534 8/16/13 8:57 AM  LOVE, LOVE COMMAND “Christ the Lord” (christos kyrios [Lk 2:11]), which S. E. Johnson, “Lord,” IDB 3:150-51; J. D. Kings- can be seen as a counterclaim to the alleged lordship bury, “The Title ‘Kyrios’ in Matthew’s Gospel,” JBL of Augustus (Yamazaki-Ransom, 73). 94 (1975) 246-55; idem, Matthew: Structure, Chris- Thus, the title “Lord” was of decisive importance tology, Kingdom (2nd ed.; Minneapolis: Fortress, in how the early church understood Jesus. The use of 1989); C. F. D. Moule, The Origin of Christology the term kyrios in a religious sense was certain to im- (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977); D. ply Jesus’ divinity, especially in the eastern part of the Pinter, “The Gospel of Luke and the Roman Em- Roman Empire and in Gentile contexts. The evidence pire,” in Jesus Is Lord, Caesar Is Not: Evaluating Em- suggests that this remarkable mutation in the Jewish pire in New Testament Studies, ed. S. McKnight and concept of monotheism took place in the earliest Pal- J. B. Modica (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, estinian Jewish Christian community as a result of 2013) 101-15; C. K. Rowe, “Luke-Acts and the Impe- some hints from Jesus himself and especially as a re- rial Cult: A Way Through the Conundrum?” JSNT sult of the encounters with the risen Lord as shared 27 (2005) 279-300; idem, Early Narrative Christol- by some of the eyewitnesses to the life of the histori- ogy: The Lord in the Gospel of Luke (BZNW 139; Ber- cal Jesus. The evidence indicates that the high Chris- lin: de Gruyter, 2006); idem, World Upside Down: tology of the early Christian church was not a new Reading Acts in the Graeco-Roman Age (Oxford: Ox- development of the late first century a.d. ford University Press, 2009); V. Taylor, The Gospel See also Christ; Christology; God; Rome; According to St. Mark (New York: St. Martin’s Press, Son of David; Son of God. 1966); A. J. Thompson, One Lord, One People: The BIBLIOGRAPHY. R. Bauckham, Jesus and the Unity of the Church of Acts in Its Literary Setting God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the (LNTS 359; London: T & T Clark, 2008); G. Vermes, New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity Jesus the Jew: A Historian’s Reading of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008); W. Bousset, (New York: Macmillan, 1973); B. Witherington III, Kyrios Christos: A History of the Belief in Christ from The Christology of Jesus (Minneapolis: Fortress, the Beginnings of Christianity to Irenaeus, trans. 1990); idem, Women in the Ministry of Jesus: A Study J. E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon, 1970); H. Conzel- of Jesus’ Attitudes to Women and Their Roles as Re- mann, The Theology of St. Luke, trans. G. Buswell flected in His Earthly Life (SNTSMS 51; Cambridge: (New York: Harper & Row, 1960); I. de la Potterie, Cambridge University Press, 1984); N. T. Wright, “Le titre kyrios appliqué à Jésus dans l’Evangile de The Resurrection of the Son of God (COQG 3; Min- Luc,” in Mélanges bibliques en hommage au R. P. neapolis: Fortress, 2003); K. Yamazaki-Ransom, Béda Rigaux, ed. A. Descamps and A. de Halleux The Roman Empire in Luke’s Narrative (LNTS 404; (Gembloux: Duculot, 1970) 117-46; A. Deissmann, London: T & T Clark, 2010). Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Il- B. Witherington III and K. Yamazaki-Ransom lustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco- Roman World, trans. L. R. M. Strachan (repr., Grand Lord’s Prayer. See Prayer. Rapids: Baker, 1978); J. D. G. Dunn, Christianity in the Making, 2: Beginning from Jerusalem (Grand Rap- Lord’s Supper. See Last Supper. ids: Eerdmans, 2009); J. A. Fitzmyer, “New Testa- ment Kyrios and Maranatha and Their Aramaic LOVE, LOVE COMMAND Background,” in To Advance the Gospel: New Testa- The love command appears in different forms in the ment Studies (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, canonical Gospels, and close study highlights their 1998) 218-35; idem, “The Semitic Background of the nuances. But among the Gospels, John offers a New Testament Kyrios-Title,” in A Wandering Ar- unique and detailed engagement with this topic, amean: Collected Aramaic Essays (SBLMS 25; Mis- which is best understood in relation to the Johan- soula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979) 115-42; E. Franklin, nine letters and community. Christ the Lord: A Study in the Purpose and Theology 1. The Love Command of Jesus in the of Luke-Acts (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975); Canonical Gospels G. Howard, “The Tetragram and the New Testa- 2. The Theology of God’s Love in Johannine ment,” JBL 96 (1977) 63-83; L. W. Hurtado, One God, Literature One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jew- ish Monotheism (2nd ed.; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1. The Love Command of Jesus in the 1998); idem, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Canonical Gospels. Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003); The canonical Gospels agree that the love command 535 DJG 2nd Ed. BOOK FILE.indb 535 8/16/13 8:57 AM