Associate Director and Research Associate for New Testament
Caskey Center for Biblical Text and Translation, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary
Tyler Craft ( PhD Candidate in Biblical Studies, SEBTS) serves as a research associate for New Testament, as well as the associate director, for the Caskey Center for Biblical Text and Translation at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. His dissertation research examines the meaning of Psalm 110 in its original context to determine what type of hermeneutic Jesus employed in his citation of Psalm 110:1 in the Synoptic Gospels. His research interests include the NT use of the OT, NT textual criticism, Septuagint, and Matthean studies.
Thursday, May 28 | 3:10-3:45 | Breakout 1
The Curious Case of Κύριος: Εἶπεν κύριος as the Preferred Reading in the Citation of Psalm 110:1 in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts and Its Exegetical Significance
Little attention has been given to the textual and exegetical significance of the presence or absence of the definite article in the phrase ειπεν [ο] κυριος τω κυριω in Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, and Acts 2:34. The NA28/UBS5 omit the article in the Synoptic Gospels and bracket it in Acts 2:34. In the ECM, the article is included in Mark 12:36 and Acts 2:34, while the preliminary online version of ECM Matthew lists the variant with a Split Guiding Line. Although the text-critical ECM commentaries note the weak attestation for the omission, discussion of the variant’s broader significance is lacking.
I will argue that the anarthrous reading should be preferred in Matt 22:44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42, and Acts 2:34. It situates the discussion of the variant within the LXX translation technique of rendering the tetragrammaton with an anarthrous κυριος. While Ps 109:1 LXX is often assumed to contain the article, P. Bodmer XXIV, unavailable to Rahlfs, strongly suggests that the Old Greek omits the article.
The paper begins with a survey of critical editions and commentaries, showing that discussion typically focuses narrowly on source criticism. It then assesses the external evidence, including early witnesses and patristic citations. Although the attestation overall favors inclusion of the article, several early A-related witnesses and patristic citations demonstrate that the external evidence is not decisive.
The internal evidence proves more compelling. First, I establish that the LXX translation technique with κυριος is a feature of the Old Greek, not merely a “Christian” manuscript phenomenon. I then deal with authorial style. Matthew’s use of κυριος consistently reflects LXX practice when referring to God. Luke likewise displays awareness of this technique, particularly in direct speech. Moreover, all three Synoptic Gospels preserve the anarthrous κυριος in LXX citations elsewhere. Further, if the reading in P. Bodmer XXIV is original, the Synoptic Gospels and Acts likely attest this earlier text form.
The paper concludes by considering the theological and exegetical implications, suggesting that the nominative κυριος reflects the tetragrammaton and aligns closely with the Hebrew Vorlage of Ps 110:1.