The "Lord" Jesus Christ			St. Paul
								10/13/2007
Intro

   There is a young American named David Ker who works in Africa, translating
   the Bible into African languages.
   
   As a translator, he puzzles over how to translate Biblical languages
   into words and phrases that convey the intended Biblical meaning
   in terms that people of very different cultures can understand.

   We looked at examples of that in Mr. Black's Bible study before the Feast,
   considering the balance that Bible translators try to strike between
   being literally correct with the scriptures, and being understandable.
   Mr. Ker does that continually, as a translator.  He has to meditate on
   on the literal words of scripture.
   
   He posts his thoughts on the internet on a website called
   lingamish.wordpress.com.  Early this year he posted a study of the word
   "Lord" in the New Testament.

   "Lord" is very common, very important, New Testament word.  He is looking
   to understand its proper meaning so that he can find good words in other
   (specifically African) languages that convey the real meaning of the word.

   I think that the observations he made about the word "lord" showed some
   insight.

   His postings got me to thinking about that word, as well.  It is a common
   word.  Probably an over-used word in some circles.  It can be just
   a "religious" word, with little meaning.
   You probably cringe a little at "the little lord Jesus," or constant talk
   of "praise the Lord," or "know the Lord".

   Jesus is often called "the Lord Jesus Christ".  And many times shortened
   to just "the Lord".  But it should really be a very meaningful word.
   It is descriptive of our very own relationship to the One who holds the
   key to life and eternity.

SPS

   It's a big subject to go exhaustively through the word "lord", as the
   word appears over 700 times in the New Testament.
   
   But Mr. Ker had some interesting insights here.  They apply to the church
   of God even more, I think, than even Mr. Ker appreciates.  So I'll pass on
   his observations, and elaborate a little on some additional implications
   to us.

   1) First, the word "lord" has several meanings that we should consider.
   2) The word "lord" has an especially important meaning as "master" that
     I want to focus on.
   and 2 points about a "master":
   3) that a master is served
   4) that a master serves

   For a title: The "Lord" Jesus Christ - and underline "Lord".

Body

1) Meanings of "Lord". (717 times in the NT)

   The word "lord" is "kurios" in Greek  k-u-r-i-o-s
   Strongs says it comes from "supremacy".  David Ker says its core
   meaning is "one who commands."
   I see 4 ways in which it is used in the New Testament:

   1. A title both for God and for Christ.
      So when Jesus is called "the Lord Jesus Christ", is "Lord" used
      to say that Jesus is God?  Some people would contend that.
      After all, Jesus is the son of God - he is God in that sense.  And
      there are many statements about his role in the Old Testament.

      God's name in the Old Testatment is the 4-letter (tetragramaton) YHVH
      (Yahweh) - spelled LORD in the KJV.  But his title is Lord ("adon"). 
      And so God is called "Lord" many times in the Old Testament.

      And that is true right on into the New Testament.  The title "Lord"
      is therefore a little ambiguous.

      Take for example Acts 2:34: (Peter's sermon on Pentecost)
      For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself
      (and he quotes Psa 110:1)
      The Lord said unto my lord, Sit thou on my right hand, ...

      In Psa 110 it is "the YHVH said unto my adon"
      but in NT Greek it is the Lord (kurios) said unto my lord (kurios).

      And Peter concludes that God has made Jesus to be both Lord
      and Christ.

      So Lord can be a title of supremacy for the supreme God, God the
      father, or for God the son, who has been given supremacy over
      the whole earth -- above the angels as Paul says in Hebrews.

   2. A title for a sovereign, prince, or leader
      The Roman emperor, for example.  "lord" is used 54 times in the New
      Testament in such a sense.  A king or emporer, is addressed as "lord".
      Jesus is annointed to be a king, so "Lord" fits him in this way as well.

   3. A title of honor expressive of respect and reverence.
      Of respesct such as a servant would use to greet their master.  We
      would say "sir" or "mister".  "Lord" is used 12 times this way in the
      KJV.
      According to a scholar of religious history named Geza Vermes, most 
      people addressed Jesus as lord during his lifetime as a sign of respect
      for a miracle-worker (especially in Matthew and Mark) or as a teacher
      (especially in Luke).

    But fourthly - and this is the one I want to focus on today -
    4. Owner - one who owns and controls property. 
       And that property includes especially servants and slaves.  This "lord"
       owns slaves.  kurios is translated "master" or "owner" 12 times in
       the KJV.

    When Jesus is called "the Lord Jesus Christ" it seems to me that "Lord"
    is meant in this way.  It's not just a religious word.  Not just a title
    of respect.  And not just a title of a king, for that would be redundant
    to calling him the "Christ".

    I think the sense of it is usually as owner or master.  And its that
    meaning of "lord" that I'd now like to consider.
   
2) Jesus as Master

   Jesus is a "master" in the same way that a human can be a "master".
   
   David Ker:
   There is a tendency of English translations to use different words for
   kurios depending on whether it is referring to God or a man.
   
   English translations tend to use "lord" when referring to God but
   "master" or "ruler" when referring to men. This creates some
   confusion in the minds of readers since the average reader will not be
   aware that the two words refer to a single concept and so they will often
   miss the connection between the two.
   The "lord" is the "master".  They are the same word.
   
   Notice this in the Sermon on the mount. Look at these two examples:
   
     Mat 6:24
     No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love
     the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye
     cannot serve God and mammon.
   
     Mat. 7:21-23
     Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
     kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in
     heaven.
     Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in
     thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done
     many wonderful works?
     And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye
     that work iniquity.
   
   The words master and lord are translations of the same word "kurios".

   He is the "master" of slaves.  True slaves cannot say "master, master"
   but not do what he commands.
   
   In what sense is Jesus the "master"?
3) Jesus as a master to be served.

   This is not too hard to understand.  A master is to be served and obeyed.
   A master, a New Testament "kurios", is the owner of slaves.

   But let me elaborate as to the reason why that fits the OT type and
   NT antitype of the church.
 
   The type of the church in the Old Testament were the firstborn of Israel.
   The firstborn of Israel were at first intended to be a priesthood of sorts.
   They were the group of people whose very lives were spared in Egypt by
   the blood of the Passover lamb.
   They were in that sense "purchased" by the blood of the lamb.
   God bought their very lives by that Passover.

   The firstborn were to be used in service to God:
   Exodus 22:29
    Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy
    liquors: the FIRSTBORN of thy sons shalt thou give unto me.
   If a firstborn was not to be given into that service there was a price
   that had to be paid to redeem him.
 
   But God changed that plan early on in the wilderness, when the tribe of
   Moses and Aaron, the tribe of Levi, was particularly loyal to God.

   In the book of Numbers (chapter 3), the tribe of Levi was explicitly
   traded for the firstborn of all Israel.  And that tribe was given to
   the high priest:
   Num 3:9
     And thou shalt give the Levites unto Aaron and to his sons: they are
     wholly given unto him out of the children of Israel.

   The family of Aaron were just a small part of the tribe of Levi, and they
   served as the priesthood.  The rest of the tribe were given to Aaron
   as servants.  They didn't serve in the sacrifices of the tabernacle, but
   they did its other physical work.  They were to be the teachers of God's
   law to the nation.  And under king David they served as administrators
   of the kingdom.
 
   So the Levites were a small people that was "wholly given" to the high
   priest.
 
   I bring this up because the antitype of the Levites in the New Testament
   is the church -- you and me.  We are in a similar position.

   We, the church, is spoken of as purchased by the blood of the lamb.
   
   The church is called to serve the real high priest.  And Christ is that
   high priest:
   Heb 4:14
     Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the 
     heavens, Jesus the Son of God, ...

   Our relationship to that high priest is thus as his possession, his
   servants:
   John 17:6
     I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest
     me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; ...

   Paul says we are "bought with a price" (I Cor 6:20), a
   "purchased possession" (Eph 1:14).
   He told the elders of the church
   "feed the church of God (or Lord), which has hath purchased with his
    own blood (or blood of his own [Son])"  (see RSV)
   (Acts 20:38)
   
   Paul says we belong to Christ in ICor 15:23 (speaking of all men being
   resurrected at some point):
     But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits;
     afterward they that "are Christ's" at his coming.
   
   The Passover lamb is the first of the firstfruits - the wave sheaf.  Then
   those who BELONG to the high priest - the firstborn - who are also the 
   first harvest.
   So we address our "Lord Jesus Christ", because he is our master, our owner.
   We were purchased, and given as servants.
   
But fourthly, there is another aspect of being a "lord" that David Ker
brought out in his internet postings.

4) Jesus, as a lord, is a provider for his subjects.

  A) We need to know something about a first century lord

   As Americans we have an intuitive idea of what a "master" is.
   But our understanding differs from those of the first century simply
   because they had a more intimate acquaintance with this concept.

   In addition to associating the term kurios with owning of slaves, a Greek
   speaker of the first century would have associated this term with other
   concepts as well:
   
   * A kurios is wealthy
   * A kurios is the head of a large household
   * A kurios is in charge of others
   * A kurios is responsible for the welfare of his slaves

   In Paul's day a household, presided over by the "kurios", included not
   just the slaves, but the slaves' children as well.  And the lord's 
   household of course included his wife and children.
   And the lord of the household is leader, provider and protector to his
   slaves, just as he is to his wife and children.

   Because this cultural practice of "master of the household" is unknown to
   us it is hard for us to understand our role as slaves within this context.
   We read right over the word "lord" without considering its meaning.
   
   Notice that the implication for us as slaves of Jesus, is that our
   "lord" is responsible to take care of us
   
   If Jesus is our master he takes upon himself the welfare of his slaves.
   We are his to command. But we are also his to be clothed, and fed, and
   provided for in every way.
   
   This is also a large part of understanding Jesus' teaching about serving
   two masters.  Or of Paul's choosing which master we will obey.
   It is not only a matter of fleeing from the cruel and difficult master.
   It is choosing to be under the care of our benevolent lord.
   
  And there is an interesting example of such a "lord" in the New Testament.
  B) Philemon as a lord

   You might remember that there is a strong connection between the
   letter to the Colossians and the letter to Philemon. From what Paul says
   in Col 4 it appears that these letters were dispatched together for Colosse.
   - Both Colossians and Philemon have nearly identical greetings
     (Col 1:3-5, Philemon 4-6)
   - And both mention the same people: Aristarchus, Archippus, Epaphras, 
     Onesimus and Tychicus.

   (And they might have traveled with the letter to the Ephesians. And even
    possibly even a fourth letter to Laodicea (Col 4:16)).
   
   But another piece of evidence that links Colossians and Philemon, as
   David Ker points out.  Something that is not apparent to readers of an
   English translation.  And that is the master/slave theme in Colossians.
   
   When Paul wrote Colossians he may have been preoccupied with the case of
   Onesimus, a runaway slave. And in the letter to the Colossians he gives
   extra attention to the master/slave relationship, with Philemon and
   Onesimus in mind.

   In fact in Colossians Paul gives much more emphasis to the slave/master
   relationship than to any other relationship. Col 3:22-4:1 are all
   concerning this relationship.
   Even the earlier verses in Col 3 about husbands and wives, and parents
   and children, are framed in a context of how our behavior relates to
   "the Master" or "the Lord". So the idea of "master of a house" pervades
   the book of Colossians.

   Christ, as the "lord", or "head of our household" is in a position 
   similar to Philemon's.

   Philemon was the "kurios" of a prosperous household as well as a slave
   owner.  Paul wrote Colossians to him and to those who heard it read in 
   "the church that meets in your [Philemon's] home" (Philemon 2).
   
   But Paul calls Philemon "a fellowlaborer" (Phm 1), as he is in turn
   Christ's slave, even though he is also a lord.  
   He exhorts Philemon to receive Onesimus back into his household:
   Phm 15
   ".. he departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever."

   Philemon is the head of household.  He receives service from Onesimus his
   slave.  But he also is to provide for and take care of Onesimus.

The word "lord"

   The reason the master/slave theme of both Colossians and Philemon is not
   apparent, says David Ker, is that most English translations use various
   words to translate the Greek word kurios.  It is translated "Lord" when
   referring to God or Christ, but "master" when referring to slave owners.
   (Col 3:22 4:1)
   
   Because kurios is translated with different terms it isn't immediately
   apparent that Paul is making a connection between the "Lord" and a
   slave owner. 
   The New International Version brings out this connection in its
   translation of Col. 4:1:
       Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because
       you know that you also have a Master in heaven.
      (KJV:
       Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing
       that ye also have a Master in heaven.)

   Paul could be speaking to Philemon here - "provide for your slaves".
   Just a Christ our master leads and guides us to his kingdom.

   But we almost always read right over the same "master" meaning elsewhere
   when the word is translated as "lord".  And it usually is translated
   "lord" because tradition prevents translators from using any other word.

   This highlights an on-going translation difficulty in English:
   the word "lord" is now an archaic and its use in English is almost
   strictly limited to references to God or Christ.
   
   When the word "lord" is used in modern English it carries archaic
   overtones with it, or even used in a slightly mocking tone.

   Today we either have religious people speaking of "the lord".  Or
   movies using it for the supposedly supernatural, as that Dark Lord Sauron
   in Lord of the Rings. Or Lord Vader in Star Wars.

   But "lord" is an important part of Christ's name.
   He is the Lord Jesus Christ.
    His name is Jesus - Joshua, our deliverer or savior.
    He is the Christ - the Messiah or annointed king
   But is also our lord or master - so you might say the name "Lord Jesus
   Christ" is "master, our deliverer, the annointed king".

Conclusion

   The point is, don't read over the word "lord" without some thought.  It is
   not just a "religious" word.

   Our "lord" is our master, our boss, our owner.  We are part of his
   household.
   We serve him because he owns us.
   And he leads and takes care of us because we are his household.
 
   That is the role of a "lord".