Chili

That must have been the wrath of God having drunk from the cup of his anger to the Samarains, of course.

For the sake of clarity I should have added in my previous post the distinction made between 'man' as created and 'the man' in particular as banshed from Eden to include each one of us in all.

jakejonesiv

Or those who have drunk from the cup of Simon of his wrath.

Chili

Sure as the father gains presence thru Simon but the wrath is originative from God as first cause and therefore the cup of his anger. To see this we just need to be reminded that lukewarn needs presence to make itself known wherefore then there was absence instead of presence for them . . . and I am reminded that it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

spin

Do you envisage that christians also altered Jewish works such as the Psalms of Solomon, the Wisdom of Solomon, Joseph and Asenath, the Letter of Aristeas, which all feature κυριος?

Here's a 2nd/3rd c. papyrus fragment from Oxyrhynchus, P.O. 656:



This is from Genesis and contains the verse 24:42 which, counting eight lines up from the bottom, contains

ΟC ΤΟΥΚΥΡΙΟΥ[]ΟΥ

which is [θε]ος του κυριου [μ]ου, ie "god of my lord" (=adonai). But at the end of the line above is ΚΥ for κυριε. Gen 24:42 talks of "..the lord the god of my lord Abraham.."

(The fragment features a second hand inserting κυριος, after the first hand had left space for the palaeo-Hebrew script YHWH & adonai, as was the earliest custom. However, this was not to be.)

In the Dead Sea Scrolls one major approach was to substitute four dots for the tetragrammaton. The idea appears to be aimed at avoiding even inadvertent speaking of the name of god. In Greek the same effect was reached early on by using Hebrew letters for the tetragrammaton. Lev 24:16, which talks about putting to death one who blasphemes the name of YHWH, though in the LXX it has become "names the name". According to Origen, writing circa 225 in his commentary on Psalms (2:2), explain that adonai (in Hebrew) or κυριος (in Greek) were used when reading the name.

Though the unpronounceable name of the Tetragrammaton is not said, it was also written upon the high priest's gold diadem, and the name is pronounced as "Adonai." By no means is the Tetragrammaton pronounced, but, when said in Greek, it is pronounced "Kyrios."

The use of physical means not to say the tetragrammaton are found in Hebrew from before the turn of the era. This is also seen in the earliest Greek texts as well. The only problem is what was said instead in Greek. Origen seems clear enough.

tanya

Thanks, spin, to answer your question, no. Not any longer, after encountering (thanks Jake) 1 Corinthians 8:6, in which both θεὸς and κύριος appear in the same verse, refuting my contention that Christians had doctored the original texts, replacing all the "theos" with "kurios". I had imagined that the earliest Christians had associated Jesus, referred to as "the lord", as equal in stature with yahweh, hence, demanded the same title for both, in essence degrading God senior's status to be equivalent to junior's. I was wrong.

Clearly, I also erred, imagining that the earliest Christians demanded change to LXX, to conform to trinitarian doctrine. Accordingly, I cannot explain the two κυριος in Psalm 110, with or without "the", with or without context.

:notworthy: