[B-Greek] Mt 22:44 and an absence of the article
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Jun 27 17:54:01 EDT 2006
On Jun 27, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Peter Brzeski wrote:
> So would it be correct to view the anarthous KURIOS in these verses
> as a
> substitute for a proper name, and as such as being a proper name
> in some sense? Wallace states that KURIOS is *not* a proper name, but
> wouldn't it qualify for such in this instance? Or should we rather
> it as a one-of-a-kind, monadic noun? Would KURIOS fit into any (or
> possibly both) of these two categories?
It might actually be preferable to call it a "title" than a proper
name. After all, anarthrous KURIOS seems to translate into Greek the
Hebrew ADONAI which is what is "read" aloud when the tetragram is
encountered in public reading. But as you suggest, there may be a bit
of equivocation here; one might raise a similar question about
CRISTOS: is it a proper name or a title? I'd be inclined to say that
it's a title commonly used "as if" it were a proper name, but others
might be ready to claim it actually IS a proper name.
And then, perhaps also one might want to raise the question: is NT
usage of anarthrous KURIOS simply a reflex in NT writers of LXX
usage? I'd be inclined to think so.
If Al Pietersma is currently with us, I'd be curious to know his
opinion on this matter.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
More information about the B-Greek