Print chapter

Change the font size using your browser settings.

To print the entire Bible book, close this and use your browser’s normal print option.

Your actual print-out will look different, depending on paper size and margin settings.

If the “Send to printer” button does not work, use the Print option in your browser menu.

It’s possible that large parts of the New Testament were originally penned in Aramaic and only translated into Greek (although Mark, Luke, and Acts were likely originally in Greek). Even if this were not the case, then the Aramaic version would still be very useful to us. Why? Because as a very early translation it would show how people understood these books back then.

Jews and early Christians used ‘Lord’ as a euphemism for the Divine Name, YHWH (Jehovah/Yahweh).

In Greek this was kyrios (‘Lord’), used without the article (‘the’) beforehand. This ‘grammar error’ was a special signal to the reader that Lord was replacing YHWH.

Aramaic also used Lord as a euphemism, but would use a different trick to let readers know when it was replacing YHWH. What? Well, the word has several different spellings:

• A full spelling, mryh (“marya” or “maryah”),
• A shorter version, mry (“mary”),
• A different shorter version, mrh (“mara” or “marah”),
• And an even shorter version, mr (“mar”).

In Palestine, the tradition arose that people would use the shorter versions (usually mara or marah) to refer to ordinary human lords, and reserve the full version, maryah for only the highest and most important human lords, or as a euphemism for YHWH.

Indeed, it was a useful coincidence that it has the -yah ending, as this would remind Jews of the shortened form of God’s Name, Jah/Yah. This is much like the Jah/Yah- on many peoples’ names, like Jeremiah and Jesus. So to Jews, the Aramaic word maryah may have reminded them of the expression ‘Lord Yah.’

Remember, maryah is not a Jewish invention. It is an Aramaic word, invented by the Syrians and Babylonians. Maryah was used in official Aramaic of the Syrian royal court. So it’s rather unlikely that the Babylonians intended to say ‘Lord Yah’ to mean ‘Lord Yahweh.’

So maryah doesn’t necessarily always mean YHWH. It is still an ordinary word meaning Lord. This longer version may have simply been seen as more formal or respectful than the shorter mry/mrh/mr versions.

So maryah has two meanings:

1. The full, formal version of Lord (used by all Aramaic-speakers).
2. A euphemism for YHWH (used only by Jewish and Christian Aramaic-speakers).

Therefore, the 210 occurrences of maryah in the Aramaic New Testament are all potential YHWH euphemisms. Of course, in some places it may just mean Lord and nothing more.

How can we tell which is which?

By the same methods that ancient readers used: the context, recognizing common quotes and sayings, and common sense.

The uses are:

• maryah (Lord Jah) 94 times
• d'maryah (of Lord Jah) 82 times
• b'maryah (in Lord Jah) 11 times
• d'almaryah (of the Lord Jah) 2 times
• l'maryah (the Lord Jah) 19 times
• w'maryah (and Lord Jah) 2 times

To see a list of all instances, please see our page All instances of Maryah in the New Testament.

---

Verses where maryah refers to Jesus

Matthew 22:43; 22:45 (likely corruptions) – These instances of maryah could well be later corruptions since the parallel accounts in Mark 12:35-37 and Luke 20:41-42 do not quote Jesus as referring to himself as maryah at all. Indeed, our research shows that Matthew has more corruptions and later insertions than any other Bible book. These seem to be just two more.

Luke 2:11 (possible mistranslation and not a proper noun) – Jesus is called the ‘Lord (maryah) Messiah.’ However, if Luke was originally written in Greek (and we suspect it was), then it only says kyrios, with no implication that it is a euphemism for YHWH. This means that the translator decided to put maryah here off his own back, and it is not inspired. We don’t know when this translation was made, so it could be a later trinitarian mistranslation or even a copyist error. Alternatively, the translator may have been trying to be respectful by using the full spelling of Lord. The same issue arises in Acts 2:36.

John 8:11 (spurious text) – This reference to Jesus as maryah is within the spurious account of the woman caught in adultery. This was added years after John wrote his Gospel and is not genuine.

Acts 2:36 (possible mistranslation and not a proper noun) – Jesus is called the ‘Lord (maryah) Messiah.’ However, if Luke was originally written in Greek (and we suspect it was), then it only says kyrios, with no implication that it is a euphemism for YHWH. This means that the translator decided to put maryah here off his own back, and it is not inspired. We don’t know when this translation was made, so it could be a later trinitarian mistranslation or even a copyist error. Alternatively, the translator may have been trying to be respectful by using the full spelling of Lord. The same issue arises in Luke 2:11.

Acts 2:38 (spurious addition) – Jesus is called ‘Lord (maryah) Jesus’ here in the Aramaic. However, in (what is likely to be) the original Greek, there is no mention of ‘Lord’ here. So this maryah is a spurious addition by the Aramaic translator. It is also likely not intended to be a euphemism for YHWH since “get baptized in the name of Jehovah-Jesus the Anointed One” not only makes no sense but also contradicts other verses only using the name Jesus in baptisms.

Acts 9:10 (possible mistranslation) – The context shows that the Lord here is Jesus, and the Aramaic text says maryah. However, this book was written in Greek and then translated into Aramaic, so maryah was the choice of the translator. The original Greek shows no implication that this was a euphemism for YHWH as there is no Greek ‘grammar error’ nor any other indication. The Greek just says ο κύριος (the Lord) and κύριε (o, Lord), so they ought to have been translated as variants of mara, not maryah, unless the Aramaic translator was just wishing to use the full spelling of Lord to be respectful.

Acts 9:27 (not a proper noun) – This book was originally in Greek, and the use of maryah in Aramaic is the translator’s choice. The Greek does not have the ‘grammar error,’ so this was probably originally meant to just say Lord, and is not a euphemism for YHWH.

Acts 18:25 (mistranslation) – Here, the reference to Lord is likely to Jesus, based on the context. Also, the Greek has the article (‘the’) beforehand. Therefore, this is not a euphemism for YHWH. However, Acts was likely originally written in Greek, so using maryah here was the choice (or misunderstanding) of the translator and is not inspired. The next verse, Acts 18:26, is also mistranslated.

Romans 14:9 (not a proper noun) – Jesus is described as the Lord (maryah) of both the living and the dead. The use of maryah does not appear to be a euphemism for YHWH, as the word is not actually naming him but describing his role. Therefore, it should be translated into English as Lord. The use of maryah is appropriate since he has total authority. The word was likely chosen because it is the full version of Lord.

Romans 14:14 (not a proper noun) – The verse says ‘Lord Jesus’ so this is not a euphemism for a proper noun.

1 Corinthians 8:6 (not a proper noun) – Jesus is described as the ‘one Lord (maryah).’ However, this is not a euphemism for YHWH because it is not a noun here; maryah is being used as a description. Using the full spelling of Lord would be appropriate because he has the highest authority. Note also that the Apostle goes to pains to separate the Father and Son here by describing the two as ‘one God, the Father,’ and ‘one Lord, Jesus.’ ‘We’ are described as being in the Father, but through Jesus, just like we go through a passageway to go into a room.

1 Corinthians 11:27 (not a proper noun) – Jesus is called Lord, or maryah here, twice. However, it does not appear to be a euphemism for YHWH since the Greek translation has the article (‘the’) before both instances, implying that it was understood to mean Lord as a title, and it is not where a proper noun would go. The writer may have used the full spelling of Lord to stress Jesus’ authority – especially considering that the previous verse calls Jesus mara, not maryah (in the spelling d’maran).

1 Corinthians 11:29 (not a proper noun) – Jesus’ body is called the body of maryah here. However, it does not appear to be a euphemism for YHWH since the Greek translation has the article (‘the’) before it, implying that it was understood as a title, not as a proper noun. It therefore appears to be merely the full spelling of Lord rather than a euphemism. Note that earlier in verse 26 it calls Jesus mara, not maryah (in the spelling d’maran).

1 Corinthians 12:3 (not a proper noun) – Jesus is called Lord, or maryah. This is describing his role as Highest Lord with complete authority. It is not a euphemism for YHWH.

Ephesians 4:5 (not a proper noun) – Here maryah is not a euphemism for YHWH as there is nobody claiming that there is more than one YHWH. However, different ones may claim that there are different Lords to follow. So here Jesus is described as a Lord using the full spelling maryah.

Philippians 2:11 (not a proper noun) – Jesus is called maryah (as d’maryah) as a title meaning Lord, and this is not a euphemism for YHWH.

James 5:7 (not a proper noun) – This cannot be a euphemism for YHWH because Jehovah/Yahweh is not expected to come/arrive except via his Son, Jesus. Also, in the next verse, it says that the maryah will make an appearance, and the Bible says that no man can see God. Therefore, maryah must just be the full spelling of Lord and cannot be a euphemism.

James 5:8 (not a proper noun) – The Aramaic says ‘our Lord’ (our maryah). Therefore, this is not a euphemism for YHWH, but the full spelling of Lord being used as a title for Jesus.

1 Peter 2:3 (not a proper noun) – Here, maryah could refer to Jesus, as the next verse describes approaching him. The Greek translation uses the article and says ‘the Lord,’ indicating that it was not understood to be a euphemism for a proper noun. Therefore, here maryah appears to be just the full spelling of Lord.

1 Peter 3:15 (not a proper noun) – Here, the Aramaic text differs from the Greek text quite wildly. The Greek refers to the ‘Lord God’, while in Aramaic, it says ‘Lord (maryah) Anointed One’. We chose to use the Aramaic version since that could be the original. Here, maryah is not used as a euphemism for a proper noun but reads as merely a full title applying to Jesus.

Revelation 22:20 (not a proper noun) – Since it’s used in the phrase ‘Lord Jesus’ here, maryah is likely not a euphemism for the Divine Name, but is just the full version of Lord, showing respect for his full authority. Note that Jesus is referred to as maran in the next verse.

---

Verses where maryah refers to the Almighty Father

All of the verses listed as Category #5 on our page The Divine Name in the New Testament use maryah to refer to the Father.

In addition, the below instances are where the Aramaic uses maryah, but our translation either says Lord or God instead or omits it entirely.

Here are the reason(s) why.

Matthew 3:3, Mark 1:3, Luke 3:4, John 1:23 – This quote is from Isaiah 40:3, which says YHWH in the Hebrew. The context of Isaiah 40:9 shows that the Lord who is coming is YHWH. However, in our translation, we use Lord in Isaiah 40:3, not Jehovah/Yahweh, and therefore quote it that way here in Matthew 3:3. Why do we do this? Well, we believe that at some point after the return from Babylon, the Jews removed all instances of “YHWH” from the text but then later restored them. In so doing, some references to YHWH were accidentally ‘restored’ where they were not there originally. We think that this is one of those places. However, we’re not dogmatic about this and could be wrong.

Mark 2:26 (mistranslation) – The Aramaic wording mentions the table of maryah here, just as the parallel account in Matthew 12:4 does. However, the Greek text does not mention the table of kyrios, and such words are omitted. We believe that Mark was originally written in Greek, so our translation goes by the Greek text and leaves this reference out.

Luke 2:24 and Luke 6:4 (mistranslations) – If Luke was originally written in Greek (and we suspect that it was), then there is no mention of Lord or God here. The Aramaic translator added maryah here, and therefore, we do not believe this mention to be inspired.

Luke 2:38 – If this was originally in Greek, the Aramaic translator chose to put maryah here because, from the context, it’s obvious that AnNa was thanking Almighty God in heaven, not the nearby baby Jesus. However, since there is no Greek ‘grammar error’ here, this was probably not understood as a euphemism for YHWH by the author (assuming there was no later tampering, of course). However, AnNa was probably speaking Aramaic when she said those words. So it’s possible that she was saying maryah as a euphemism for YHWH, and when her words were translated into Greek to write the gospel, this inference was lost somehow. So perhaps this should read as Jehovah/Yahweh after all. We just don’t know.

Luke 17:29 (mistranslation) – This says that the Lord, maryah, rained down fire on Sodom. However, Luke was probably originally written in Greek, and the Greek version does not mention the ‘Lord’ here. So our ancient translator friend chose to add a reference to maryah, confirming that he understood it to be a euphemism for YHWH. However, it likely does not belong in the text.

Acts 4:24 (mistranslation) – We believe that Acts was originally in Greek, and the Aramaic translator chose to put maryah here, but the Greek says ‘God,’ not ‘Lord.’ It’s possible that God is also a euphemism for YHWH here, but we cannot be sure, so we leave it saying God.

Acts 6:3 (mistranslation)– The Aramaic translator has added Lord (maryah) here, but it does not appear in (what is likely) the original Greek.

Acts 7:31, Acts 7:33, Acts 9:15 – Here Paul describes the voice of maryah speaking to Moses. However, if we look up the account, it was actually the voice of a spirit messenger (an angel), which we believe the Hebrew originally described as Lord, not YHWH. You see, we believe that the Name was removed and ‘restored’ incorrectly (in a small number of places) by the Jews after the return from Babylon. Also, this verse in Acts was originally written in Greek, so putting maryah instead of mara or mary could just be the uninspired opinion of the translator. However, we’re not 100% sure of this.

Acts 7:37 (mistranslation) – If this verse was originally written in Greek, then the inspired account says ‘God’ not ‘Lord.’ Thus the Aramaic translator chose to put maryah here. Therefore our translation says God.

Acts 15:17 – This verse was originally written in Greek, thus the Aramaic translator chose to put maryah here. However, it’s likely that this is not a euphemism for YHWH since ‘our Jehovah/Yahweh’ just isn’t a common phrase. It’s possible that Paul just meant Lord, and our ancient translator colleague then used maryah just to mean Lord or Highest Lord and not as a euphemism for the Divine Name. He simply couldn’t use any other version of the word Lord to describe the Almighty. However, it is a potential euphemism for YHWH; it would just be an odd-sounding one.

Acts 16:32 (possible mistranslation) – Some Greek texts say the word of the Lord, others say the word of the God. It’s very difficult to tell which is correct. Either way, the article is present beforehand, so it’s probably not a euphemism for YHWH. Therefore, maryah may just be the opinion of the Aramaic translator. Note that the previous verse mentions Lord Jesus as mara (inflected as b’maran), not maryah. So while this verse is likely referencing God Almighty, it is probably not a euphemism for YHWH.

Acts 18:26 (mistranslation) – The original Greek does not say Lord here, but God. This is the same error found in many other places (see above).

Revelation 6:10 – By calling Him ‘Sovereign Lord,’ no other version of Lord could be used. Therefore, this is probably not a euphemism for YHWH.

---

Verses where it’s unclear to whom maryah is referring

Luke 1:17 – Here, the messenger is referring to the prophecy made in Isaiah 40:3. Although in most manuscripts it says ‘prepare the way for Jehovah/Yahweh’, this is one of the places we suspect that YHWH was inserted into the text incorrectly at some point. See our page about the Divine Name for more information. However, we cannot be certain about this, as the Greek has the usual ‘grammar error’ here that we would expect to be a euphemism for YHWH. The Aramaic translation also puts maryah here, so people understood the verse in Isaiah to be referring to Yahweh.

Acts 2:20 It seems that Acts was originally in Greek, so the Aramaic translator may have chosen to put maryah here off his own back. Why ‘may?’ Well, our translation usually translates expressions like Day of the Lord using Lord, even though the Hebrew Masoretic text usually says “day of Jehovah/Yahweh”. This is because we believe this expression is probably corrupted in the Hebrew text and said Lord originally.

Acts 2:21 – This is quoting Joel 2:32, which reads “name of Jehovah/Yahweh” in the Hebrew Masoretic text. However, our translation says “name of the Lord” in that verse. We believe it’s (probably) a corruption of the Hebrew text. Although Acts 2:21 says maryah here, the Aramaic translator probably just put that there from his own opinion and assumed that Lord here was a euphemism for YHWH. Alternatively, the translator could have just been using the full spelling of Lord, with no implication that it’s a euphemism for the Divine Name. We just don’t know.

Acts 5:14 – This verse was originally written in Greek, so it was the choice of the Aramaic translator to put maryah here rather than another form of Lord. The context suggests that the Lord mentioned is Jesus; since the apostle is preaching in the temple, it would seem odd for the people who began believing in ‘the Lord’ to be just starting to believe in Jehovah/Yahweh; otherwise, why would they be at the temple to begin with? Therefore this is likely not a euphemism for YHWH.

Acts 10:36 – This verse was originally written in Greek, so it was the choice of the Aramaic translator to put maryah here rather than another form of Lord. The translator may have assumed (which may be correct) that Lord is not referring to Jesus but refers back to Almighty God, mentioned in verses 34 and 35. Alternatively, maryah may be chosen because it is the full form of the word for Lord, implying the greatest form of Lord, rather than it being a euphemism for YHWH. We simply don’t know.

Acts 11:21 – There are two mentions of maryah in this verse. The first one is missing the article before it in Greek. Therefore, the first instance is translated as Jehovah/Yahweh. What about the second instance? The Aramaic translator seems to have assumed that this second kyrios (actually kyrion) was referring to YHWH, which may be correct. However, the Greek text has the article beforehand. So this could be a reference to Jesus. Therefore, we leave it as Lord, and the reader can decide. Note that Jesus is called mara in the previous verse. Therefore, this verse’s second mention of maryah may indeed be a euphemism for YHWH, but we just don’t know.

Acts 11:17 – This verse was originally written in Greek as kyrios. The Aramaic translator chose to assume that the Lord here was YHWH, and so used maryah. However, Peter may have been calling the angel who freed him Lord, not God (who sent the angel). Our Aramaic translator friend assumed that Peter was giving credit to Almighty God (which may be correct), but since we don’t know for sure, we have left it as Lord.

Acts 13:10 – This could be a euphemism for YHWH, but in the Greek text it contains the article (‘the’), which implies that maryah was just a choice of the Aramaic translator. In Greek, it appears as τας οδούς κυρίου (literally: the ways of Lord), or the Lord’s ways. However, in the mid-4th-century Codex Sinaiticus, the article has been crossed out, as if the scribe realized that it should not be there (the Vaticanus and Alexandrinus codexes show it normally). Therefore, this could also have originally been missing the article in Greek. If we combine this fact with the use of maryah in the Aramaic text, then we could easily see this as another euphemism for YHWH. We just don’t know for sure.

Acts 13:12 – The original Greek version contains the article (‘the’), so this may be a reference to Jesus, with maryah merely being the choice and opinion of the Aramaic translator. The context could support either a reference to the Lord Jesus or a euphemism for YHWH; since the man is a Gentile, both Jesus and Jehovah/Yahweh would be new to him. However, it says teachings of the Lord, so it is more likely to be a reference to Jesus because the Apostles were, of course, spreading his teachings, and Jesus was known as the ‘Great Teacher.’ However, we don’t know for sure, so we leave it as Lord.

Acts 13:49 – The original Greek version contains the article (‘the’) here and says the Lord. So this maryah may just be the opinion and assumption of the Aramaic translator. This was probably done to match up with the previous verse, which, in Aramaic, was mistranslated to say ‘glorifies God’ instead of ‘glorifying the word of the Lord,’ so using maryah here matches up with the previous mistranslated verse. However, given the Apostle’s comments in verses 46 and 47, the use of Lord here could well have been a euphemism for YHWH. We simply cannot tell.

Acts 14:3 – This verse was originally written in Greek as kyrios. The Aramaic translator chose to assume that the Lord here was YHWH, and so used maryah. This is probably because Paul and BarNabas were preaching to a Gentile city where some Jews were present, and previously said to them, ‘We were told that we had to speak the word of God to you first’ and have not yet mentioned Jesus (at least as recorded in the account). Then, they spend a lot of time ‘boldly telling them about the Lord.’ Our Aramaic translator seems to have assumed (which may be right) that they are teaching them that YHWH sent Jesus to die for their Sins. Thus Lord could be referring to Jehovah/Yahweh or to Jesus. Both would work in the context. Since we can’t tell, we are leaving it as Lord.

Acts 14:25 (mistranslation) – The Aramaic version says they preached the word of maryah, but the original Greek does not mention Lord at all.

Acts 14:26 (mistranslation) – The original Greek says of the God here, not of the Lord.

Acts 18:9 – This verse was originally written in Greek, and Lord was kyrios. The Aramaic translator chose to use maryah, perhaps thinking that the ‘Lord’ here was YHWH. However, it could easily be the resurrected Jesus. Therefore we leave it as Lord.

Acts 19:10 (mistranslation) – The original Greek says the word of the Lord Jesus. However, the Aramaic misses out ‘Jesus’ and just says Lord, as maryah. This is, therefore, probably a mistranslation, and the casual Aramaic reader would wrongly assume that this is a euphemism for YHWH, but it is not.

Romans 10:12 – This may be unclear to some, however this reference to Lord is probably to the Almighty Jehovah/Yahweh. So the Aramaic is correct to use maryah here, but it likely isn’t a euphemism for YHWH since ‘we all have the same Lord’ is a complete sentence, and ‘we all have the same Jehovah/Yahweh’ is a weird way of using a proper noun.

Romans 10:13 – This is quoting Joel 2:32, which reads “name of Jehovah/Yahweh” in the Hebrew Masoretic text. However, our translation says “name of the Lord” in that verse. We believe it’s (probably) a corruption of the Hebrew text. Although Paul likely said maryah here, he could have just been using the full spelling of Lord, with no implication that it’s a euphemism for the Divine Name. Note that in the Greek translation, the article (‘the’) is present.

1 Corinthians 4:5 – The expression ‘the Lord’s Day’ originally comes from Hebrew. While the Hebrew Masoretic text today phrases that expression as ‘Jehovah’s Day,’ we believe this is a corruption of the Hebrew text. The original phrase may have just said Lord. Therefore, in this instance, maryah is probably not a euphemism for YHWH, although some perhaps understood it that way at the time.

1 Corinthians 7:17 – It may seem that the Lord who calls you mentioned here is Jesus, but the Apostle is probably just using a synonym for God instead of saying ‘God’ twice in a row, as is customary in many languages, including Aramaic. So could maryah refer to God Almighty? Probably, because earlier in the same book (in 1 Corinthians 1:9), the Apostle states that it is God who calls you to have a share with Jesus: ‘For God, who called you to have a share with His Son (our Lord Jesus the Anointed), is faithful.’ If you search the Bible text, you’ll see that this expression always means that YHWH is doing the calling, e.g. Isaiah 42:6: ‘I’m Jehovah/Yahweh, who called you in justice.’ For this reason, we translate maryah as Jehovah/Yahweh here.

1 Corinthians 10:26 – While the context doesn’t clarify which Lord is being referred to, it is probably God Almighty since the discussion is about the Old Law. Since the article (‘the’) is not missing in the Greek, this is likely not a euphemism for YHWH. The Aramaic maryah likely just means Lord.

1 Corinthians 12:5 – Lord (maryah) here refers to the source of the gifts. The previous verses, and the verse afterward, say that they come from ‘God.’ However, this is not a euphemism for the name YHWH because ‘they all come from the same Jehovah/Yahweh’ makes no sense in English and probably makes no sense in Aramaic either. Therefore, we translate it as Lord. Although, we could be wrong.

1 Corinthians 15:58 – Two instances of maryah are here. Since the previous verse, 57, talks about thanking God for Jesus, we assume that these references are to God Almighty, especially since the Greek translation is missing the article (‘the’) in the second instance. We do not translate them both as Jehovah/Yahweh because usually, a synonym is used instead of the same word twice. We guess that the first use is meant to be the title Lord because the Greek uses the article. With it missing in the second instance, that’s probably a euphemism for YHWH. We’re basing this only on the Greek translator’s accuracy, though, and he may have got it wrong! Either way, both instances probably refer to God, although the first one could be a reference to Jesus.

1 Corinthians 16:10 – The instance of maryah here is not missing the article (‘the’) in the Greek translation, so the ancients probably didn’t understand it as a euphemism for YHWH. It could be giving either Jesus or Jehovah/Yahweh the full title of Lord.

2 Corinthians 2:12 – It is a little ambiguous which Lord is being referred to here by using maryah. In the wording, it could easily be a euphemism for YHWH. The Greek translator understood it to mean YHWH and so translated it with the ‘grammar error’. Also, in context, Paul has already mentioned the Anointed One. If this Lord was referring to the same person, he may as well have said something like, ‘...to preach the good news about the Anointed One, and he opened a door for me there’. However, he didn’t phrase it this way, but instead introduced a contrast with maryah. So here maryah might refer to Almighty God, and could even be a euphemism for YHWH. However, we don’t know.

2 Corinthians 3:16-18 – Here, there are four instances of maryah. Paul talks about people turning to maryah, the breath/spirit of maryah (twice), and the glory of maryah. These could easily be referring to turning to Jesus, his glory, and his spirit. However, these phrases are so common in the Old Testament – in the Law, the prophets, and the psalms – in referring to YHWH, that any Aramaic-speaking Jew who read or heard them would likely assume that maryah is a euphemism for YHWH. So in this translation, we make the same assumption and translate maryah as Jehovah/Yahweh. Like all these decisions, this is not made dogmatically and is open to future change.

2 Corinthians 10:18 – Since this occurrence of maryah (Lord) comes with the article (‘the’) beforehand in the Greek translation, it seems that the ancients understood this as simply meaning the Lord and not as a euphemism for YHWH. Therefore it could be referring to either Almighty God or Jesus. Since Jesus previously appointed the Apostles, it would be consistent for this reference to be a title given to Jesus, but we cannot be sure.

Ephesians 4:17 – It’s unclear from the context which Lord is being referred to. While it has the Greek ‘grammar error’, this could just be the opinion of the Greek translator from when he saw maryah being used. Yet, Paul could have simply been using maryah as the full spelling of Lord and not as a euphemism for YHWH. Since we don’t know, in this translation, we’re just leaving it as Lord.

Philippians 2:29 – It’s unclear from the context which Lord is being referred to. While it has the Greek ‘grammar error’, this could just be the opinion of the Greek translator from when he saw maryah being used. Yet, Paul could have simply been using maryah as the full spelling of Lord and not as a euphemism for YHWH. Since we don’t know, in this translation, we’re just leaving it as Lord.

Colossians 4:7 – It’s unclear from the context which Lord is being referred to. While it has the Greek ‘grammar error’, this could just be the opinion of the Greek translator from when he saw maryah being used. Yet, Paul could have simply been using maryah as the full spelling of Lord and not as a euphemism for YHWH. Since we don’t know, in this translation, we’re just leaving it as Lord.

Colossians 3:22 – It’s unclear which Lord is referred to here. Some Greek manuscripts say God here, while others say Lord. So it seems that at least some ancients believed this verse is referring to God and not to Jesus. What may be the original Aramaic version, of course, says maryah. Is maryah a euphemism for YHWH here? No idea. We’ve left it saying Lord so the reader can decide for themselves. On the one hand, “the fear of Jehovah/Yahweh” was a common expression in the Old Testament. On the other hand, the next verse (v23), “work at it wholeheartedly as though you’re doing it for the Lord,” uses mara for Lord, not maryah. So this first occurrence of Lord in verse 22 could simply be the full spelling of Lord, in reference to Jesus in Glory. If so, then this is not a euphemism for YHWH after all, and (some) Greek translators mistranslated it to say God. So which is right? You can decide for yourself.

2 Timothy 2:19 – In reference to the second maryah here, this is a commonly mistranslated verse (as explained in this translator note). Paul is (we think) paraphrasing Joel 2:32, a verse where we think the original Hebrew was corrupted (long, long before the wonderfully accurate Masorets) to include an extra YHWH. We might be wrong about that, of course. However, if we are correct, then the verse in Joel is saying Lord as part of a messianic prophecy about Jesus. Therefore, this maryah here in 2 Timothy is not a euphemism for YHWH, but just the full version of Lord. After all, when Joel was translated from Hebrew to Aramaic (either in written form or as an orally transmitted Targum), someone had to decide which spelling of Lord to use. Would it be mara or maryah? It seems that someone chose maryah. They may have thought the Lord was Jehovah/Yahweh, but in fact, it was a messianic prophecy and the Lord would turn out to be Jesus. However, maryah is still the fitting Aramaic word since it is the full version of Lord; it isn’t always a euphemism for YHWH.

James 3:9 – The Aramaic says, ‘we bless Lord (maryah) and Father,’ but the Greek version says, ‘we bless The God and Father,’ probably because the Greek translator assumed that maryah is a euphemism for YHWH or at least refers to Almighty God. However, this was just his opinion. Does maryah here refer to Almighty God, or is it a euphemism for YHWH, or was it a reference to Jesus being Lord with full authority? We don’t know.

2 Peter 3:10 – The Old Testament expression Day of the Lord was originally coined in Hebrew, so at some point, Aramaic speakers had to translate it into their language. They chose to use maryah. Later, we believe the Rabbis inserted YHWH into the Hebrew, so the expression says now “Day of Jehovah/Yahweh” in the Hebrew Masoretic text. So we believe that the original Old Testament said “day of the Lord,” and that Peter understood it as such. So in this verse, although it says maryah, we translate it as Lord. The Lord is probably referring to Jesus and is not a euphemism for YHWH. Indeed, the full spelling of maryah is appropriate for the King.

2 Peter 3:15 – The expression ‘our Lord’ (our maryah) could be referring to Jehovah/Yahweh or Jesus. However, the expression “our maryah” is not known as a euphemism for “our YHWH.” Therefore it is just the full spelling of Lord. Which Lord it is, however, is up to you to decide.

---

Learn more about the Divine Name, why we use it, and why we use it our New Testament.

> Read more translator notes

Our other websites: The 2001 Commentaries

---

The 2001 Mailing list

Receive news and interesting tidbits of information from our translation project by signing up.

Sign up

---