Sorry I should not have implied that there are no exceptions. But I think there is a difference between "κυριος" and the other cases, though I can't think of a reason. The LXX says "ο κυριος" where the MT says "יהוה" only at Exo 9:27, Num 32:31, Deut 1:20, 11:17, Jdg 13:23, Jdg 16:20, Ruth 1:21, 1 Sam 12:16, 2 Chr 12:6, throughout Job (where "κυριος" without the article is used for "אל" instead, but "κυριου" often lacks the article even for "יהוה" and Job 40:1 has "κυριος ο θεος" for "יהוה"), Psa 9:7, 25:8, 33:13, Psa 34:6,8,17, 35:27, 40:16, 41:1, 55:16, 68:16, 69:33, 85:12, 93:1,4, 96:10, 97:1, 99:1, 103:6,8, 110:1, 111:4, 113:4, 116:5,6, 118:13,14,18,24, 135:4,6, 145:8, 147:2,6, Prov 6:16, 22:2, 29:13, Isa 62:2, Isa 63:7, Ezek 8:12, 9:9. Excluding Job, this is only 50 occurrences compared to roughly 2000 occurrences of "κυριος" without the article where the MT has "יהוה", so I consider this to be a consistent use of "κυριος" as a symbolic reference for "יהוה". I still think that it is a little misleading for LSJ to state "ο κυριος", but never mind that.Stephen Hughes wrote:You might like to check the accuracy of this statement. Here are a few verses that you might like to consider...David Lim wrote:"ὁ Κύριος, = Hebr. Yahweh, LXX Ge.11.5, al.; of Christ, 1 Ep.Cor.12.3, etc." which is not accurate because the "κυριος" used for "Yahweh" in the LXX doesn't have the article and behaves like a symbolic substitute rather than retaining its original grammatical function as a count noun.
The use of the article for cases other than the nominative seems haphazard, and it would be interesting if there were some simple reasons that account for most of them.
I am also aware of such instances, which assuming the LXX translators were following the MT's text, still doesn't imply anything about the use of "κυριος" for "יהוה", but as you indicated only implies that they didn't always stick to strictly formal equivalence. There are many possible reasons why they deviate in some places. Here in particular one hypothetical explanation is that they wanted to juxtapose "ανθρωπον" and "θεου" for a contrastive effect.Stephen Hughes wrote:Look at this verse where the personal name of God is not marked out especially;This shows by exception that יהוה was not only represented with אֲדֹנָי (’ăḏōnāy) / Κύριος throught the LXX. In this verse we find ὁ Θεός, and it is used with the article. It seems that this is a real translation not a substitution or replacement - the words between which you were asking about the difference.Genesis 4:1 (MT with translit +LXX) (last few words) wrote:וַתֹּ֕אמֶר קָנִ֥יתִי אִ֖ישׁ אֶת־יְהוָֽה׃
wattōmer qānîṯî ’îš ’eṯ-יהוה (’ăḏōnāy)
"and she said I have gotten a man from יהוה (LORD)
καὶ εἶπεν ἐκτησάμην ἄνθρωπον διὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ
"and (she) said, "I have acquired a man through God's help.""
Yes I would think so.Stephen Hughes wrote:But just for variety, let's look at Genesis 4:26 and how that renders יהוה:Here perhaps Κύριος is a substitution for יהוה and ὁ Θεός is an explanation of the name.Genesis 4:26 (MT with translit +LXX) wrote:(MT with translit +LXX)אָ֣ז הוּחַ֔ל לִקְרֹ֖א בְּשֵׁ֥ם יְהוָֽה׃
’āz hūḥal, liqrō bəšêm יהוה (’ăḏōnāy)
Then (people) began to call on the name of יהוה (the LORD)
οὗτος ἤλπισεν ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ
He [Seth] possessed the hope to call upon the name of the LORD God
Agreed, but is the generalization really incorrect for "κυριος" in the nominative case?Stephen Hughes wrote:The Septuaginta has a lot of variety and it is difficult to make generalisations about it.