56
LORD
.1
If the interpretation was given by Peter when speaking to Cornelius, it provides an interesting illustration of the way in which the first preachers of Christianity adapted themselves to the new con- ditions in which they found themselves, when they began to preach to Gentiles. The Saviour of the world must not have a local or national con- fessional title, (cf. the words of Paul and Silas to the Philippian jailer as they are given in MlAB, and accepted by Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf, and other critical editors, ' Believe on the Lord Jesus (i.e. believe on Jesus as Lord), and thou shalt be saved,' Ac 16^i. Also, ' No man can say that Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Ghost' (1 Co 12^), and ' every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father,' Ph 2^'). To the Jewish Christian, Jesus was the 'Messiah,' to the Hellenistic Christian Jew He was ' the Christ,' and to the Gentile Christian He was ' the Lord.' The Hellenistic and Gentile terms are combined in our familiar name ' the Lord Jesus Christ.' The interpretation of ' Christ ' as ' Lord ' enables us to understand that tlie essential idea of the first term is that of Sovereignty or Lordship. The Saviour is the Lord, the Possessor and Ruler of the Kingdom of God.
This title readily acquired its highest significance as one of Divine honour among the Gentile Chris- tians, especially in the Jlast. ' Oriental religions are fond of expressing the relationship between the divinity and the devotee, as that of tlie " Lord " or " Lady " to a slave ' (Deissmann). The higher sig- nificance of the title was most likely assisted also by the fact that among Hellenistic Jewish Christians Kvpios was in use as a Divine title applied to God.
(2) With the article, tlie title is api)lied to Jesus (rt) by Himself, directly, as ' Ye call me Master and Lord ' (more literally, ' the Teacher and tiie Lord ') ( Jn 13^*), and indirectly, as ' (The) LORD said unto my Lord (tuj Kvpiix) fj.ov), Sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool' (Mt 22-'^). {b) The historical apiilication of tlie title, with the article, to Jesus is specially significant. Tischendorf and Westcott-Hort omit the title in this form, in the only place where it is found in Mt. (28«). It occurs twice in Mk. (IG'^-O), i.e. in that part of the Gospel which is regarded by critical editors as not belonging to the original MSS. Therefore it is only in the Gospels of Lk. and Jn. that the title in this form is api)lied his- torically to Jesus. This is a strong argument for the earlier composition of Mt. and Mk., for the title became so common in the Apostolic Church that its absence from these Gospels can be explained only by their early date. The title occurs 18 times in Lk. and 12 times in John. Twelve of the in- stances in Lk. are found in passages which are peculiar to that Gospel, as ' the Lord appointed other seventy' (Lk 10^). The other instances may be regarded as editorial additions (7^^ IP" 12^^ 17''-^ 24'*). Tliree of the instances in Jn., which are found in tlie early part of the Gospel, are plainly editorial additions (4^ 6-^ 11-). The remaining in- stances are found in the last two chapters of the Gospel, and in passages which are peculiar to it. Tliey deal with the risen life of Jesus, and were written at a time when the higher conceptions of His personality gave a deeper significance to the title, and when its confessional meaning was uni- versally known. The adoring cry of Thomas, ' My Lord and my God ' (6 KvpLos /xov Kai 6 deos /xov) Jn 20^*, is an illustration of how among Jewish Christians the title of resjiect addressed to a teacher became one of Divine honour. Yet, as Dalman says, ' it must ... be remembered that the Aramaic- speaking Jews did not, save exceptionally, desig- nate God as " Lord," so that in the Hebraic section of the Jewish Christians the expression "our Lord"
LORD
was used in reference to Jesus only, and would be quite freh from ambiguity ' (p. 329).
i. In comparing jjarallel passages in which the title occurs, it is to be noticed tiiat other titles are sometimes employed as equivalent terms in address- ing Jesus. — i. Mt 825 (xCfiie) ' Lord, save us : we perish.'
Mk 438 (hihaa-xxX') 'Teacher, carest thou not that we perish?' Lk 824 (ii-ia-rxTx) ' Master (teacher), we perish.'
ii. Mt 17-* (xipii) ' Lord, it is good for us to be here.' Mk 95 ("Pa.iifiii) ' Rabbi, it is good for us to be liere.' Lk 933 (iTi/rra.ra.) ' Master (teacher), it is good for us to be here.'
iii. Mt 262-i {xipn) ' Is it I, Lord?' Mt 20-3 ('Pa/i/Ss.) ' Is it I, Rabbi?" Jn 1325 {-Mpit) 'Lord, who is it?'
The variety in the title used in addressing Jesus is not confined to the parallel passages. It is to be seen throughout each of the Gospels. Arranging tlie titles in the order of i)reference, Mt. uses Kvpios, diSaffKaXos, and 'Pa^^el ; Mk. 5iodaKa\os, 'Fa^jiel, 'Pa/S/JoDj'et, and Kvpios ; Lk. Kvpios, 5i5dtr/ca\os, and ein- aTarrji ; Jn. /cupiof, 'Pa;3/3et, 'Pa/3/3oiii'et, and 8i5dffKa\os. Sometimes the variety of the title is seen even in the same passage. It cannot be without intention or meaning that in (iii.) Mt. represents the eleven dis- ciples as asking, ' Is it I, Lord ? ' while Judas, the traitor, says, ' Is it I, Kabbi ? ' (Mt 2622- 25). Possibly Judas indicated his position of detachment or opposi- tion by using ' Rabbi ' instead of the title employed by the rest of the disciples. It is only by Judas that Jesus is addressed as ' Rabbi ' in Mt. (26-=- *^). There must also be some ditt'erence of feeling in the use of ditt'erent titles in Lk 5'^ ' Master (teacher, fTrtordra), we have toiled all night' ; and Lk 5®, where Peter, after the miraculous draught of fishes, falls at the feet of Jesus with the cry, ' Depart from me ; for I am a sinful man, O Lord ' (KvpLe). But it is possible that the variation of title in the parallel passages may have taken place in the process of oral transmission, or in translation from the Aramaic.