[B-Greek] Phil 2:11
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Mon Oct 20 06:14:57 EDT 2003
[Dmitriy:]> Thank you for your input. From you, I got that good idea to make
a simple
> search on using the phrase "Lord Jesus" in the NT. I really found a huge
> number of places where that phrase is used. Thus now I know that the
> phrase "Lord Jesus" is used as often as "Jesus Christ", or "Lord Jesus
> Christ", or "Our Lord Jesus Christ".
Not quite. KURIOS IHSOUS occurs 7 times in the nominative (as in Phil 2:1)
and 56 times in total, all after the resurrection (one in Mark 16:19, one in
Luke 24:3, the rest in Acts and later.) Whether KURIOS is predicate or
"KURIOS IHSOUS" is used as a combined name, can only be seen in context. But
a good guideline is that when the article precedes KURIOS the two words are
seen as a unit that basically functions as a name where the meaning of
KURIOS is present, but not in focus (the Lord Jesus). When no article is
present, the focus is on the meaning of KURIOS as a relationship (Jesus is
my/our Lord). (Often KURIOS is qualified by hHMWN, but in some cases the
relationship is taken for granted and a hHMWN or MOU is to be implicitly
understood from context).
IHSOUS CRISTOS occurs 11 times in the nominative (as in Phil 2:11) and 135
times in total. It is very rare in the gospels. It only occurs in the
introductory narration of the author (Mat 1:1,18; Mark 1:1, John 1:17) and
in a rare instance in Jesus' own speech (John 17:3) as retold by John.
It should also be noted that CRISTOS is used almost exclusively as a title
in the gospels, but since the reference is unique, it normally has the
article (as stated in BDF ? 273). When we come to Acts, the situation begins
to change, although in Jewish contexts, the meaning of Christ as Messiah is
in the foreground. The nominative occurs four times in Acts, always spoken
by a Jew to Jews:
9:22 hOTI hOUTOS ESTIN hO CRISTOS (title - the Messiah)
9:34 IATAI SE IHSOUS CRISTOS (Jesus Christ(Messiah) heals you)
17:3 hOTI hOUTOS ESTIN hO CRISTOS (title - the Messiah)
26:23 EI PAQHTOS hO CRISTOS (title - the Messiah, spoken to Jews)
After Acts, CRISTOS is used more and more as a fixed title that comes close
to a proper name. In case both CRISTOS and IHSOUS occur together, the
tendency is that if CRISTOS comes first, there is some focus on the aspect
of Messiah, but if IHSOUS comes first, CRISTOS functions as a proper name
appended to IHSOUS. If CRISTOS occurs alone, it is difficult to know which
aspect of meaning is in focus, the reference to Jesus or the aspect of
Messiahship.
As a Bible translator, I therefore have the following rule of thumb: If in
the gospels and Acts, translate CRISTOS with Messiah. If after Acts,
translate by Christ, unless the word order or context indicates that the
aspect of Messiahship is in focus.
Whereas CRISTOS as a title carries a lot of meaning to the Jews, the title
KURIOS carries more meaning to the Gentiles. It seems to me that the normal
title in Gentile circles is Lord and as this title moves into prominence,
the title CRISTOS at the same time moves from being a Jewish meaningful
title to a Greek name.
> Still some insisted that because the word KURIOS is on the 1st place it
> must be a predicate. And this is my question that remains: is this really
> so? If yes, I would have to admit that my variant of translation is
> wrong. If not, I will be inclined to accept it. Can anybody refer me to
> any grammar article or something that can prove or disprove that the
> predicate MUST possess the 1st place?
It is not that it MUST be predicate, but the normal expectation is that it
would be predicate in that position, especially since there is no article
before KURIOS. (When KURIOS refers to YHVH, God, the Father, it often does
not have the article, but that is not the case here).
To quote Rod Decker's excellent rules (thanks to Doug), the relevant one
would be
2a. If one is a proper noun (i.e., a name) and the other a common noun, it
is the subject.
(His rule 3 applies to John 20:31 as a convertible proposition, but I won't
comment further on that.)
Your argument is that KURIOS IHSOUS is a proper name, but that would go
against the normal usage of that combined name, because it ought to have the
article if used as subject. Then your argument is that CRISTOS is the
predicate (or complement), but that goes against the normal rule that
CRISTOS in the sense of Messiah carries the article when used as a
complement (or as subject). It further goes against the pattern of the sense
of Messiah being prominent in the gospels and Acts, but much less so in
Paul's letters. It is therefore better to take IHSOUS CRISTOS as a proper
name here in Phil, which makes it the subject and the common noun KURIOS the
predicate (complement).
To sum up, there is adequate grammatical and contextual evidence for all
translations to agree that the correct rendering of Phil 2:11 is "Jesus
Christ is Lord".
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list