Lord

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew adonai in the Old Testament typically refers to God. The shorter adon (and in two cases in the book of Daniel the Aramaic mare [מָרֵא]) is also used to refer to God but more often for concepts like “master,” “owner,” etc. In English Bible translations all of those are translated with “Lord” if they refer to God.

In English Old Testament translations, as in Old Testament translations in many other languages, the use of Lord (or an equivalent term in other languages) is not to be confused with Lord (or the equivalent term with a different typographical display for other languages). While the former translates adonai, adon and mare, the latter is a translation for the tetragrammaton (YHWH) or the Name of God. See tetragrammaton (YHWH) and the article by Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff. for more information.

In the New Testament, the Greek term kurios has at least four different kinds of use:

  • referring to “God,” especially in Old Testament quotations,
  • meaning “master” or “owner,” especially in parables, etc.,
  • as a form of address (see for instance John 4:11: “Sir, you have no bucket”),
  • or, most often, referring to Jesus

In the first and fourth case, it is also translated as “Lord” in English.

Most languages naturally don’t have one word that covers all these meanings. According to Bratcher / Nida, “the alternatives are usually (1) a term which is an honorific title of respect for a high-ranking person and (2) a word meaning ‘boss’, ‘master’, or ‘chief.’ (…) and on the whole it has generally seemed better to employ a word of the second category, in order to emphasize the immediate personal relationship, and then by context to build into the word the prestigeful character, since its very association with Jesus Christ will tend to accomplish this purpose.”

When looking at the following list of back-translations of the terms that translators in the different languages have used for both kurios and adonai to refer to God and Jesus respectively, it might be helpful for English readers to recall the etymology of the English “Lord.” While this term might have gained an exalted meaning in the understanding of many, it actually comes from hlaford or “loaf-ward,” referring to the lord of the castle who was the keeper of the bread (source: Rosin 1956, p. 121).

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight

Following are some of the solutions that don’t rely on a different typographical display (see above):

  • Navajo (Dinė): “the one who has charge”
  • Mossi: “the one who has the head” (the leader)
  • Uduk: “chief”
  • Guerrero Amuzgo: “the one who commands”
  • Kpelle: “person-owner” (a term which may be applied to a chief)
  • Central Pame: “the one who owns us” (or “commands us”)
  • Piro: “the big one” (used commonly of one in authority)
  • San Blas Kuna: “the great one over all” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Guhu-Samane: Soopara (“our Supervisor”) (source: Ellis Deibler in Notes on Translation July, 1967, p. 5ff.)
  • Balinese: “Venerated-one” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Yanesha’: “the one who carries us” (source: Nida 1952, p. 159)
  • Northern Emberá: Dadjirã Boro (“our Head”)
  • Rarotongan: Atu (“master or owner of a property”)
  • Gilbertese: Uea (“a person of high status invested with authority to rule the people”)
  • Rotuman: Gagaja (“village chief”)
  • Samoan: Ali’i (“an important word in the native culture, it derives from the Samoan understanding of lordship based on the local traditions”)
  • Tahitian: Fatu (“owner,” “master”)
  • Tuvalu: Te Aliki (“chief”)
  • Fijian: Liuliu (“leader”) (source for this and six above: Joseph Hong in The Bible Translator 1994, p. 329ff. )
  • Bacama: Həmə miye: “owner of people” (source: David Frank in this blog post )
  • Hopi: “Controller” (source: Walls 2000, p. 139)
  • Iyansi: Mwol. Mwol is traditionally used for the “chief of a group of communities and villages” with legal, temporal, and spiritual authority (versus the “mfum [the term used in other Bantu languages] which is used for the chief of one community of people in one village”). Mwol is also used for twins who are “treated as special children, highly honored, and taken care of like kings and queens.” (Source: Kividi Kikama in Greed / Kruger, p. 396ff.)
  • Ghomala’: Cyəpɔ (“he who is above everyone,” consisting of the verb cyə — to surpass or go beyond — and pɔ — referring to people. No human can claim this attribute, no matter what his or her social status or prestige.” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn )
  • Binumarien: Karaambaia: “fight-leader” (Source: Oates 1995, p. 255)
  • Warlpiri: Warlaljamarri (owner or possessor of something — for more information tap or click here)

    We have come to rely on another term which emphasizes God’s essential nature as YHWH, namely jukurrarnu (see tetragrammaton (YHWH)). This word is built on the same root jukurr– as is jukurrpa, ‘dreaming.’ Its basic meaning is ‘timelessness’ and it is used to describe physical features of the land which are viewed as always being there. Some speakers view jukurrarnu in terms of ‘history.’ In all Genesis references to YHWH we have used Kaatu Jukurrarnu. In all Mark passages where kurios refers to God and not specifically to Christ we have also used Kaatu Jukurrarnu.

    New Testament references to Christ as kurios are handled differently. At one stage we experimented with the term Watirirririrri which refers to a ceremonial boss of highest rank who has the authority to instigate ceremonies. While adequately conveying the sense of Christ’s authority, there remained potential negative connotations relating to Warlpiri ceremonial life of which we might be unaware.

    Here it is that the Holy Spirit led us to make a chance discovery. Transcribing the personal testimony of the local Warlpiri pastor, I noticed that he described how ‘my Warlaljamarri called and embraced me (to the faith)’. Warlaljamarri is based on the root warlalja which means variously ‘family, possessions, belongingness’. A warlaljamarri is the ‘owner’ or ‘possessor’ of something. While previously being aware of the ‘ownership’ aspect of warlaljamarri, this was the first time I had heard it applied spontaneously and naturally in a fashion which did justice to the entire concept of ‘Lordship’. Thus references to Christ as kurios are now being handled by Warlaljamarri.” (Source: Stephen Swartz, The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. )

  • Mairasi: Onggoao Nem (“Throated One” — “Leader,” “Elder”) or Enggavot Nan (“Above-One”) (source: Enggavoter 2004)
  • Obolo: Okaan̄-ene (“Owner of person(s)”) (source: Enene Enene)
  • Angami Naga: Niepu (“master,” “owner”)
  • Lotha Naga: Opvui (“owner of house / field / cattle”) — since both “Lord” and YHWH are translated as Opvui there is an understanding that “Opvui Jesus is the same as the Opvui of the Old Testament”
  • Ao Naga: Kibuba (“human master,” “teacher,” “owner of property,” etc.) (source for this and two above: Nitoy Achumi in The Bible Translator 1992 p. 438ff. )
  • Seediq: Tholang, loan word from Min Nan Chinese (the majority language in Taiwan) thâu-lâng (頭儂): “Master” (source: Covell 1998, p. 248)
  • Thai: phra’ phu pen cao (พระผู้เป็นเจ้า) (divine person who is lord) or ong(kh) cao nay (องค์เจ้านาย) (<divine classifier>-lord-boss) (source: Stephen Pattemore)
  • Arabic often uses different terms for adonai or kurios referring to God (al-rabb الرب) and kurios referring to Jesus (al-sayyid الـسـيـد). Al-rabb is also the term traditionally used in Arabic Christian-idiom translations for YHWH, and al-sayyid is an honorary term, similar to English “lord” or “sir” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).
  • Tamil also uses different terms for adonai/kurios when referring to God and kurios when referring to Jesus. The former is Karttar கர்த்தர், a Sanskrit-derived term with the original meaning of “creator,” and the latter in Āṇṭavar ஆண்டவர், a Tamil term originally meaning “govern” or “reign” (source: Natarajan Subramani).
  • Burunge: Looimoo: “owner who owns everything” (in the Burunge Bible translation, this term is only used as a reference to Jesus and was originally used to refer to the traditional highest deity — source: Michael Endl in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 48)
  • Yagaria: Souve, originally “war lord” (source: Renck, p. 94)
  • Aguacateco: Ajcaw ske’j: “the one to whom we belong and who is above us” (source: Rita Peterson in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 49)
  • Konkomba: Tidindaan: “He who is the owner of the land and reigns over the people” (source: Lidorio 2007, p. 66)
  • Chichewa: Ambuye Ambuye comes from the singular form Mbuye which is used to refer to: (1) someone who is a guardian or protector of someone or group of people — a grandparent who has founded a community or village; (2) someone who is a boss or master over a group of people or servants and has absolute control over them; (3) owner of something, be it a property, animals and people who are bound under his/her rule — for people this was mostly commonly used in the context of slaves and their owner. In short, Mbuye is someone who has some authorities over those who call him/her their “Mbuye.” Now, when the form Ambuye is used it will either be for honorific when used for singular or plural when referring to more than one person. When this term is used in reference to God, it is for respect to God as he is acknowledged as a guardian, protector, and ruler of everything. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation).
  • Hdi uses rveri (“lion”) as a title of respect and as such it regularly translates adon in the Old Testament. As an address, it’s most often with a possessive pronoun as in rvera ɗa (“my lion” = “my lord” or “sir”). So, for example, Genesis 15:2 (“O Lord God”) is Rvera ɗa Yawe (“My lion Yahweh”) or Ruth to Boaz in Ruth 2:13: “May I find your grace [lit. good-stomach] my lion.” This ties in nicely with the imagery of the Lord roaring like a lion (Hosea 11:10; Amos 3:8; Joel 3:16). Better still, this makes passages like Revelation 5:5 even richer when we read about rveri ma taba məndəra la Yuda, “the Lion of the tribe of Judah”. In Revelation 19:16, Jesus is rveri ta ghəŋa rveriha “the lion above lions” (“lord of lords”). (Source: Drew Maust)

Law (2013, p. 97) writes about how the Ancient Greek Septuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew adonai was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments: “Another case is the use of kurios referring to Jesus. For Yahweh (in English Bibles: ‘the Lord‘), the Septuagint uses kurios. Although the term kurios usually has to do with one’s authority over others, when the New Testament authors use this word from the Septuagint to refer to Jesus, they are making an extraordinary claim: Jesus of Nazareth is to be identified with Yahweh.”

See also Father / Lord.

Translation commentary on 1 Thessalonians 4:1

Finally must be understood as a transitional, equivalent to a phrase such as “in conclusion.” It must not be understood in the sense of “you finally learned.”

Sometimes Paul’s thought is so concise that it is difficult to follow; sometimes it includes repetition for the sake of emphasis. We find both these features in this verse.

First, there is repetition. There is no significant difference of meaning in this context between beg and urge, but the two words reinforce each other (like Phillips‘ “beg and pray”). There are other ways of conveying emphasis; Bijbel in Gewone Taal, for example, has “we ask you most seriously.”

Second, there is a train of thought which is compressed to the point of obscurity. Omitting the transitional words which have been discussed above, the sentence may be broadly analyzed into the following statements, in the approximate order of the Greek: (1) We ask you in the Lord Jesus to behave as you should in order to please God. (2) We already told you how should behave in order to please God. (3) You are behaving in this way now. (4) We want you to do so still more. Even such a preliminary analysis shows that item (2) comes before the others, both logically and in time, that it is naturally followed by (3), and that (1) and (4) are closely related, (4) intensifying part of the meaning of (1). This is the basis for the restructuring and consequent change of order adopted by Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and Bijbel in Gewone Taal. The main emphasis falls on item (4), with a secondary stress on item (1). The Greek conveys this by putting (1) at the beginning of the sentence and (4) at the end. Good News Translation achieves the same effect in different ways. First it “de-emphasizes” item (2) by you learned and item (3) by of course, indicating old or assumed information, and suggesting that the main thrust of the verse is still to come. Then items (1) and (4) are combined, and emphasized by the introductory words and now.

Most translations link in the name of the Lord Jesus with we beg and urge you. This is the most probable interpretation. Paul speaks on behalf of Jesus and with his authority. However, the words the name of are implied, and it is possible to link in … the Lord Jesus with you, and translate, as Barclay does, “… to urge upon you as a Christian fellowship.” The order of words in the Greek (literally “we beg you and urge in the Lord Jesus”) makes this unlikely, as does the close parallel with by the authority of the Lord Jesus in verse 2.

In a number of languages, it is impossible to translate literally in the name of the Lord Jesus and convey real meaning, because so many languages simply do not use the expression “in the name of” as a reference either to the authority of a person or to the source of a communication. The closest equivalent in some languages is “and now, as persons who speak on behalf of the Lord Jesus, we beg you earnestly.” It may also be possible to relate “the Lord Jesus” to this urgent request by making him the ultimate source of information, for example, “because of what the Lord Jesus has said, we now urgently beg you.” In general, however, it is best to render in the name of the Lord Jesus as an indication of representation, that is, the apostles spoke on behalf of the Lord Jesus as representing him. This is probably the most satisfactory way of indicating that the ultimate authority rests with Jesus, a point which is clearly made in verse 2.

You learned from us is literally “you received from us.” Paul refers here and repeatedly later (vv. 2, 6, 11) to teaching he gave during his visit (not to what he has written earlier in this letter). The word “received” is often almost a technical term for the attitude of those to whom the Christian message is handed on (cf. 1 Corinthians 15.1). Paul has received it from Christ (cf. v. 2) and he transmits it to others. New English Bible brings this out by translating: “We passed on to you the tradition of the way we must live to please God.”

How you should live must in some languages be closely related to general conduct, since it is not existence which is in focus, but the manner in which people behave toward one another. It may be necessary, therefore, to translate as “how you should act toward one another,” or “how you should act toward people,” in order to indicate the broadest possible range of behavior and not merely attitudes toward and actions involving fellow Christians.

How you should live in order to please God is translated literally in Revised Standard Version. “To live” and “to please” are not, however, two parallel activities, but they are related as means and purpose, and most translations recognize this. To please God may be rendered as “so that God will be happy,” “so that God will look upon what you do as good,” or “so that what you do will make God content.”

In some languages it is not easy to reproduce satisfactorily a close equivalent of of course. In this context one may introduce the fact of the Thessalonians’ having lived in a proper way by saying “I know this is the way you have been living.”

The way you have been living is in the present tense in Greek (cf. New English Bible “you are indeed already following it”), and there is no suggestion that the Thessalonians have just changed their way of life for the worse. Paul is stressing the continuous aspect of their Christian living. This sentence is missing in some manuscripts (cf. King James Version), but this omission is almost certainly due to a scribal error.

King James Version‘s “abound more and more” faithfully reproduces a redundancy which is a little strange in Greek, just as in English, and which Good News Translation and many other translations therefore avoid. Paul uses here the same verb which in 3.12 (see notes) was translated make … become … great.

To do even more is an excellent rendering in English, but it poses certain problems in other languages if to do simply refers to living. In fact, it is not an increased amount of living but an increased quality of life which is indicated. Therefore one may need to translate “to do even better,” or “to behave toward other people even better.”

Quoted with permission from Ellingworth, Paul and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1976. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .