New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology: Abridged Edition

By Verlyn Verbrugge and Zondervan

This abridgment of Colin Brown’s original four volume work is arranged with its entries in Greek alphabet order, which makes it easy to find the discussion of a particular word. All Greek words are transliterated into English and linked with their Goodrick/Kohlenberger numbers. This book was formerly titled The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words. Now it has been reset in double columns and wider margins.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Zondervan
• Release date: Oct 17, 2017
• ISBN: 9780310537557

Book preview

Title Page with Zondervan logo

ZONDERVAN

New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology

Copyright © 2000 by The Zondervan Corporation

Formerly titled: The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words

Requests for information should be addressed to:

Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546

ePub Edition September 2017: 978-0-310-53755-7

---

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

New international dictionary of New Testament theology/ [edited by] Verlyn D. Verbrugge.—Abridged ed.

p. cm.

Formerly titled: THE NIV theological dictionary of New Testament words. Includes indexes

ISBN-13 978-0-310-25620-5

1. Bible. NT.—Theology—Dictionaries. 2. Greek language, Biblical—Glossaries, vocabularies, etc. I. Verbrugge, Verlyn D. II. NIV theological dictionary of New Testament words.

BS2397 .N48

225.3—dc22 2003021824

---

All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide. www.Zondervan.com. The NIV and New International Version are trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Biblica, Inc.®

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Information about External Hyperlinks in this ebook

Please note that footnotes in this ebook may contain hyperlinks to external websites as part of bibliographic citations. These hyperlinks have not been activated by the publisher, who cannot verify the accuracy of these links beyond the date of publication.

To my parents

who instilled in me a love of the Scriptures

Contents

Introduction

Abbreviations

Transliteration

Dictionary

Α alpha

Β beta

Γ gamma

Δ delta

Ε epsilon

Ζ zeta

Η eta

Θ theta

Ι iota

Κ kappa

Λ lambda

Μ mu

Ν nu

Ξ xi

Ο omicron

Π pi

Ρ rho

Σ sigma

Τ tau

Υ upsilon

Φ phi

Χ chi

Ψ psi

Ω omega

Subject Index

Scripture Index

Goodrick-Kohlenberger and Strong’s Number Conversion Charts

Introduction

This book is an abridgment of the popular New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, edited by Colin Brown. This four-volume set is itself a translation of a German work, Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament, published in the 1960s and early 1970s and edited by Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther, and Hans Bietenhard.

But the present work is much more than an abridgment. The arrangement of the material as it occurs in NIDNTT has been completely revamped and new entries have been added. Let me explain.

1. NIDNTT is arranged according to English topics. Sometimes an English category is linked to a single Greek word, but many times two or more Greek words are discussed, all of which have nuances of the English word. This abridgment has rearranged the material so that each Greek word is discussed in its own place in Greek alphabetical order. As I examined the NIDNTT, it became apparent to me that there was often little discussion of the interrelationship of Greek words within a particular semantic field. That is, rather than being a discussion of semantic domains, NIDNTT is a discussion of individual Greek words that have been grouped together according to English meaning. It therefore made as much sense to discuss these words in their sequence in the Greek alphabet. (Note that this is the method used in the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, edited by Willem VanGemeren and published by Zondervan in 1997.)

That does not mean that readers no longer have access to the discussions of other Greek words with similar English meanings, since (like NIDOTTE) at the end of many entries are cross-references to other Greek words. For example, the NIDNTT entry Death, Kill, Sleep discusses four Greek words and their cognates: apokteinō, thanatos, katheudō, and nekros. At the end of each of these words in this abridgment is a cross-reference to the other three words. You are encouraged to look up all four of these words if you want to make a thorough study of this English topic.

2. In this abridgment, each of the Greek words has a number, according to the Goodrick-Kohlenberger numbering system. This numbering system (similar but superior to Strong’s) was introduced in The NIV Exhaustive Concordance, published in 1990 (available now as Zondervan NIV Exhaustive Concordance) and edited by Edward W. Goodrick and John R. Kohlenberger III. (The same numbering system forms the basis of The Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament and The Exhaustive Concordance to the Greek New Testament.) Thus, if you use the New International Version (NIV), you can look up an English word in the Exhaustive Concordance, find its corresponding GK number, and turn to that number in this abridgment for a discussion of that word. An easier means of finding GK numbers is The NIV English-Greek New Testament, by William D. Mounce. This book contains the running text of the NIV with Greek words rearranged underneath the English words, together with parsing information and the GK number of each word.

If you use a reference work that has Strong’s numbers, conversion charts are available in the back of the present work.

3. Even though the initial lexical paragraph of each entry in this abridgment has Greek words written in Greek letters (always followed by transliteration), the rest of the entry uses only transliteration. Therefore you can read and understand this theological dictionary even if you do not know Greek. And you can easily find the cross-reference entries as well, since these too are cited both by Greek transliteration and by GK number.

4. Some material is obviously deleted in any abridgment. So what has been deleted from NIDNTT? (a) As a matter of policy, all references to secondary literature, including the extensive bibliographies, have been eliminated. These references only went as far as the mid-1970s (when the four-volume set was published), so these scholarly references are dated. If you want to know which works were consulted for any particular article in NIDNTT, you can go to the larger work for that information.

(b) NIDNTT also contained a number of full-length articles on specific topics, such as Revelation in Contemporary Theology and Infant Baptism: Its Background and Theology. These articles fit more in the category of systematic theology than that of biblical exegesis; in addition, they too are dated. Thus, they have been eliminated.

(c) Some articles of NIDNTT discussed the pros and cons of various interpretations of particular passages of Scripture. In general I have eliminated these discussions and simply given the conclusions. Also, in NIDNTT the editors made various additions to certain German original articles in order to make their content more palatable to evangelical Christians; sometimes these added comments even contradicted the original. In this abridgment, each article is a homogenous whole rather than a hybrid and is written from a thorough evangelical perspective.

(d) The discussion of the history of a particular word in classical Greek has usually been abbreviated more substantially than the rest of the original article. The important thing for the exegete to know is how a particular word was used in Hellenistic Greek, not what its presumed root meant nor how it was used in Homer, Hesiod, Plato, Aristotle, and the like. Furthermore, sometimes the authors of NIDNTT went into long discussions of Old Testament theology that had little or nothing to do with the particular Greek word being discussed; these too have been significantly shortened.

(e) In a good number of cases, the same Greek word was discussed under more than one English category, usually with virtually identical information in both places. Such multiple entries have been merged into a single entry.

5. The present work is more than an abridgment, however. It became apparent to me as I was working on this material that there were significant New Testament Greek words with deep theological significance that were omitted from the present work. For example, while NIDNTT contains a lengthy article on ginōskō, to know (1182), it has no discussion of two other Greek words that are also translated know: epistamai (2179) and oida (3857). The present work now has entries for all three of these words. To give one more example: There is no discussion of the verb hypotassō (submit, be subject to, 5718) in NIDNTT, but anyone wanting to study the words used in the New Testament regarding the relationship of husbands and wives in Ephesians 5:21–33 or between slaves and masters in 1 Peter 2:18 will need to study this word. Thus, I have added hypotassō to this abridgment and discussed its meaning.

6. One final note on Bible versions and translations. All direct Scripture translations have been made to correspond to the NIV unless otherwise noted. Regarding the Old Testament, especially the LXX, all the references given are those of the English Bible, with differences between English versification and LXX versification noted when necessary. In the book of Psalms, however, where most chapters and many verses vary by one between English translations and the LXX, only the English chapter and verse numbers are given. Finally, if a particular Greek word occurs in the LXX and has no corresponding word in the Hebrew Bible or the NIV translation, the LXX reference is given and then is so noted.

This book would not have seen the light of day if it had not been for the help of others, to whom I am deeply grateful. Britt Dennison of Zondervan New Media arranged to have the present NIDNTT keyed so that he could make this book available on CD-ROM. Nancy Wilson developed the necessary macros to convert the CD-ROM material into a usable format for me to work on, and she designed the present work and did the typesetting. Stan Gundry, vice-president and editor-in-chief at Zondervan, gave me as senior academic editor the assignment of abridging NIDNTT and encouraged me as I argued for its rearrangement in GK number order. A special word of thanks must be given to Bob Buller of Loveland, Colorado, who edited and proofread this entire abridgment after me and offered invaluable help in making it clearer and more focused.

I pray that this present work will serve interpreters of God’s Word to understand better the message of the New Testament and so help them in their preaching and teaching to give guidance to God’s people for many years to come.

Verlyn D. Verbrugge

Easter, 2000

Abbreviations

Transliteration

Hebrew

Letters

Vowels

Greek

Letters

Special Characters

Α alpha

5 ἀββά

ἀββά (abba), father (5).

OT 1. In Aram. ʾabbāʾ is originally, like the feminine equivalent ʾimmāʾ, a word derived from baby language (like our dada). Already in the pre-Christian era the word underwent a considerable extension of meaning, replacing not only the older form of address common to biblical Heb. and Aram., ʾābî, my father, but also the Aram. terms for the father and my father. In other words, ʾabbāʾ as a form of address to one’s father was no longer restricted to children but was also used by adult sons and daughters. The childish character of the word (daddy) thus receded, and ʾabbāʾ acquired the warm, familiar ring that we may feel in such an expression as dear father.

2. Nowhere in the entire wealth of devotional literature produced by ancient Jud. do we find ʾabbāʾ used as a way of addressing God. The pious Jew knew too much of the great gap between God and humanity (Eccl. 5:1) to be free to address God with the familiar word used in everyday family life. The literature of rab. Jud. contains only one indirect example of ʾabbāʾ used in reference to God (b. Taanith 23b).

NT abba occurs in the NT only 3x: Mk. 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:6. In each case it is used in calling on God in prayer. In the other Gk. literature of early Christianity abba is found only in quotations of these passages.

1. It seems clear from the Gospel tradition—indirectly confirmed in Rom. 8:15 and Gal. 4:6 (see below)—that Jesus addressed God in his prayers as my Father. In so doing, he made use of the warm, familiar term ʾabbāʾ, used in the everyday life of the family. The only exception is the cry of dereliction from the cross (Mk. 15:34 par.), which is a quotation from Ps. 22:1.

(a) The invocation ʾabbāʾ is expressly attested in the Markan text of Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane (Mk. 14:36). But in the other prayers of Jesus recorded by the Evangelists (→ patēr, 4252), there is good reason to argue that the Aram. ʾabbāʾ underlies, either directly or indirectly, the various Gk. versions of his invocation of the Father.

2. The early church took over the use of ʾabbāʾ in prayer. Note esp. Rom. 8:15 and Gal. 4:6, where Paul may have been thinking of the Lord’s Prayer. In the oldest version of this prayer (Lk 11:2–4), the invocation reads patēr, [dear] Father, and suggests ʾabbāʾ as the Aram. original. Thus, when Jesus gave his disciples the Lord’s Prayer, he gave them authority to follow him in addressing God as ʾabbāʾ and so granted them a share in his status as Son (cf. Jn. 1:12). Accordingly, Paul sees in the invocation Abba clear evidence of our adoption as sons through Christ and of the eschatological possession of the Spirit (Rom 8:14–17; Gal 4:4–7). The fact that the church, like Jesus, may say Abba is a fulfillment of God’s promise: I will be a Father to you, and you will be my sons and daughters (2 Cor. 6:18; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; also Jub. 1:24–25).

(b) This use, unthinkable for the pious Jew, of the familiar term ʾabbāʾ in prayer denotes the unique relationship of Jesus to God. It expresses not only his attitude of trust and obedience toward the Father (Mk. 14:36 par.), but also his incomparable authority (Matt 11:25–27 par.).

See also patēr, father (4252).

11 Ἀβραάμ

Ἀβραάμ (Abraam), Abraham (11).

OT The name derived either from the Babylonian Abam-rāmā, he loves the Father (i.e., God) or from the Aram. lengthening of the Canaanite name Âb-rām, the Father (i.e., God) is exalted. The popular etymology of the Heb. ʾabrāhām (Gen 17:4–5) makes the name signify father of a multitude.

1. The tradition of Gen. 11:27—25:11 depicts Abraham as the first of the so-called patriarchs, the ancestor of the later people of Israel. Admittedly, he continues to have the second place in the OT behind the patriarch Jacob, as is already indicated by the name Israel, which Jacob received and which was applied to the nation (→ Israēl [2702]), Iakōb [2609]). But a profound and far-reaching significance was attached to Abraham.

(a) Abraham stands for the prophetic experience of Israel. He is not only called a prophet (Gen. 20:7; cf. 15:13–16), he was also tested as a prophet (22:1), to see whether in his person God’s people would esteem God enough to be willing to offer human sacrifice. Abraham held to the word of his God almost to the point of killing his only son. God then released him and the people of Israel, because he loves faithfulness and not sacrifice.

(b) Abraham was the recipient of a promise of land, which steadily grew despite the scanty beginnings. His life constantly appeared threatened by the lack of a son and heir (Gen 15:2–3), and the latter was only born when Sarah was past the age of childbearing (18:1–15). In the panoramic perspective of the Pentateuch the theme of the land is not brought to fulfillment but looks towards fulfillment with the dying Moses (Deut. 34). Yet insofar as the land was never merely a physical possession but was constantly seen as a spiritual heritage (representing freedom, peace, and well-being in and with God), later Israel remained profoundly conscious of the fact that it still looked for the ultimate fulfillment of the promise to Abraham.

(c) The making of the covenant in Gen. 17 develops this theme and ensures that the land promised as a possession to Abraham and his posterity is not understood in a nationalistic way as personal property, but as the place of worship appropriate to the creator of the world (Gen. 1). In Gen. 17 the message is formulated that enabled Israel to survive even the terrible situation of national collapse and the far from glorious period of reconstruction under Persian rule.

(d) This insight was decisively influenced by the declaration that Abraham was called so that all peoples on earth will be blessed through [him] (Gen. 12:3). This declaration stands in the context of the promise of the land that looks forward to the kingdom of David (15:18) and relates these words, with their ring of power politics, to an antinationalistic perspective. Humankind, including Israel and the patriarchs, had fallen prey to the desire to be like God (3:5), to the mysterious couching of sin before the door of the heart (4:7), and to the need to establish a name for itself in a single kingdom (11:1–9). But the Lord of the world made a new beginning with Abraham, the man who unconditionally remained true to the promise (of the land) despite its meager fulfillment.

Alongside the instances where Abraham is mentioned in Gen., there is the particularly important and oft-repeated expression, esp. in Deut., the land that the Lord swore he would give to your fathers—to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (cf. Deut. 1:8; 6:10; 9:5, 27; 29:13; 30:20; 34:4). Amid the despair of the exile, this expression denotes the fixed point on which election depended: a solemnly attested promise of God that made it possible for the Israelites after the loss of the land and in the anxiety of being remote from God (Isa. 63:15—64:11; cf. esp. the complaint of 63:16!) to accept their sin as sin, because they understood God as the one who is dependable. Thus Abraham is the ancestor to whom the promise was the basis of his life; God counted this to him as righteousness (Gen. 15:6).

2. The special position of Abraham, already foreshadowed in this development, reached its highest expression in Jud. Because of Abraham’s election, all who confess themselves as his descendants have a place in the coming kingdom of God. Rab. Jud. saw Abraham’s life as a series of acts of obedience; according to it, Abraham had kept the whole law. By contrast, Hel. Jud., esp. Philo, stressed his trust in God’s promises, esp. those about the final judgment and the kingdom of God, and attributed the beginnings of belief in a world to come to his time.

NT 1. Since Abraham was the ancestor of Israel, the descent of Jesus from him became of great importance for the proclamation of Jesus as the Messiah. It underlined the continuity in God’s saving activity both for his people and the world (cf. the genealogy in Matt 1:1–17).

2. (a) For the Jews in general it was a special title of honor to be known as children of Abraham (Matt. 3:9; Lk. 3:8), for according to the popular belief, Abraham’s merits guaranteed Israel a share in the kingdom of God—an idea John the Baptist attacked. According to him, to be descended from Abraham was in itself of no value. Only those who set their hearts and minds on the coming kingdom of God, brought forth the true fruit of repentance, and by baptism anticipated the final judgment had any right to hope for a place in the kingdom. God could raise up from stones children for Abraham. That is why Jesus considered it so important to search for the lost sheep of Israel. He healed a daughter of Abraham (Lk. 13:16), cured the woman with an issue of blood who had been excluded from the community (8:43–48), and caused salvation to come to the house of Zacchaeus as a son of Abraham, although he had been living outside the Mosaic law (19:9).

When Luke records that the apostles addressed their hearers as descendants of Abraham and mentions the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, he intends his readers to understand how aware the apostles were of their loyalty to the faith of their ancestors and how strenuously they had sought to win Jesus’ people despite their unwillingness (Acts 3:12–13, 25; 13:26).

(b) Abraham’s side (Lk. 16:22) means the pouch above the girdle made by pulling up the garment slightly. It suggests special care, as that of a mother loving her child whom she carries in the folds of her dress over her breast, or the place of honor at table beside Abraham (cf. Jn. 13:23). Jud. frequently expected intercession by Abraham, who lives with God (Lk 16:22–31), as well as by Isaac and Jacob. The Jewish belief that those who have lived with God (e.g., the patriarchs) must remain alive after death was shared by Jesus, who justified it by saying that where God is, there also must be life (cf. Matt. 22:32; Mk 12:26–27; Lk 20:37–38.). The one who lives with God can die but cannot cease to live. It is from this angle that we must understand the resurrection of Jesus.

3. When Paul explains Abraham’s importance, he is concerned above all with justification (righteousness) by faith. His exposition both in Gal 3:6–20 and Rom 4:1–13 is not a deductive proof in the strict sense. Rather, in the light of the revelation of Christ, Paul recognizes that Scripture had long before spoken of justification by faith.

(a) The details of the apostle’s arguments about Abraham were partly determined by the ideas of his Judaizing opponents, who maintained that Moses’ law was the definitive revelation that brought salvation. It followed that Abraham must have lived by it, even before it had been revealed at Sinai. By contrast, Paul maintains in Gal. that anyone who wishes to live by the works of the Mosaic law is under a curse (Gal. 3:10), since it implies that people must earn their salvation. Such persons do not permit God to be the God who alone can give humankind that which is good without qualification and save them (Rom. 7; cf. Gen. 3). As Paul sees it, Scripture shows clearly that Abraham was justified not by works of the law but by faith (Rom. 4:3; Gal. 3:6; cf. Gen. 15:6).

Scripture even foresaw the placing on an equal footing of the lawless pagan and the pious Jew through faith (Gal 3:6–9), because faith excludes every basis for human honor. The Mosaic law was given to reveal that sin, in the last analysis, is directed against God and not against human beings. It thus prepared us for the recognition that our only hope is in God (3:24) and that Jesus is the promised offspring of Abraham (3:16–17). By abrogating the law, God opened to everyone the possibility of living by faith and so sharing the heritage of Abraham in all its fullness.

(b) In Rom. 4 these thoughts are expressed with even greater clarity. Abraham had nothing to boast about, for it was faith that was reckoned to him for righteousness (4:1–3). No one can earn wages from God (4:4–8; cf. Ps 32:1–2). Following methods of rab. argument, Paul maintains that God’s blessing does not result from circumcision, which Jud. regarded as a sign of the fulfillment of God’s law and of turning away from transgression (Rom 4:9–12). Abraham was, after all, justified before he was circumcised. Circumcision was simply a seal of the righteousness by faith reckoned to the Gentile Abraham. Hence Abraham is the father of believers who come from the Gentiles (4:16).

Paul then adds another example of Abraham’s faith (Rom 4:18–22). Just as we are dead before God and have nothing to hope for, so Abraham and Sarah’s procreative power was dead. But trust in God created and creates new life. The point of comparison is the deadness, the lack of any prerequisite conditions, not the willingness to yield oneself.

Paul’s view of obedience in faith was not always accepted in the early church. Jas 2:14–26 pointedly shows that Pauline concepts were misused even by Christians. For some only the relationship of the soul to God was important; the deeds of our transient bodies were considered to be relatively unimportant. Against such a view it was necessary to stress that faith expresses itself in works and that faith will be judged, as with Abraham, by the way it works itself out in life.

4. This false security with which Jews and Judaizers alike deluded themselves by appealing to Abraham contributed in great measure to this attitude. The way in which it hindered faith in Jesus is the background to the discussion about Abraham in Jn 8:30–40, 48–59. The first section (8:30–40) makes it clear that the newly found faith of the Jews was not genuine but only superficial, for they were not doing the works of Abraham (8:39–40). Abraham relied solely on God’s liberating word, but they wished to silence that word when it stood before them incarnate in Jesus. They thought that descent from Abraham guaranteed their freedom, whereas in fact only Jesus and holding fast to his word could give them true freedom.

The second section of the discussion (Jn 8:48–59) begins with the Jews’ suggestion that Jesus was demon-possessed when he proclaimed himself as God’s word. When Jesus promised eternal life to those who kept his word (8:51), he was, according to the Jews, blaspheming God. To them, he was a mortal man like Abraham and the prophets, who had died (8:52). But Jesus is greater than Abraham in the sense of being more than human. God had given him authority to grant eternal life. Jesus went on to say that Abraham had called himself happy in that he should see the day of God’s word (Jesus) (8:56). Then comes the vital sentence: "Before Abraham was born, I am" (8:58). The Word of God was, is, and ever will be. Hence Jesus is truly eternal, but Abraham lived and died.

5. The descendants of Abraham in Heb. 2:16 are presumably all who live by faith as did Abraham—i.e., all who believe in Christ. In Heb. 6:13, Abraham is presented as a model of the believing patience and perseverance that obtain the promise (See also 11:8–12, 17–19). Salvation, however, does not come from Abraham and his descendants (7:2, 4–10). They remain its recipients. Abraham recognized one greater than himself, Melchizedek. In the same way, the Levitical priests were only temporary, for they too, as descendants of Abraham, gave tithes to Melchizedek. Hence the one who has been proclaimed a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek must be greater.

See also Sarra, Sarah (4925); Hagar, Hagar (29); Isaak, Isaac (2693).

12 ἄβυσσος

ἄβυσσος (abyssos), abyss, pit, underworld (12).

CL & OT 1. In cl. Gk. abyssos is an adj. meaning bottomless, unfathomable. Used by itself with the noun gē (earth) understood, it means a bottomless place, hence abyss. In late Gk. the word stood for the primal deep, the primal ocean, the realm of the dead, the underworld.

2. abyssos occurs about 25x in the LXX, mostly to translate Heb. t ehôm, the primal ocean (Gen. 1:2), deep waters (Ps. 42:7), and the realm of the dead (Ps. 71:20). Rab. Jud. also maintained the meaning primal flood for t ehôm. The word also stands for the interior of the earth, where bodies that cause uncleanness are found.

NT In the NT abyssos is the prison for demons (Lk. 8:31; Rev 9:1–2). It is closed, but the smoke of subterranean fires rises from it (9:1–2). It is ruled by a prince—not Satan but Apollyon (9:11). Weird creatures emerge from it (9:3–11), including the beast (11:7; 17:8). Satan is bound in it for the thousand-year reign of Christ (20:1, 3). Rom 10:7–8, following Ps. 107:26, uses it to describe the realm of the dead. It is impossible for the living to descend into the abyssos.

See also hadēs, Hades, the underworld, the realm of the dead (87); geenna, Gehenna, hell (1147); katōteros, lower (3005); tartaroō, sent to Tartarus, hell (5434).

14 (agathoergeō, do good), → 19.

16 (agathopoieō, do good), → 19.

17 (agathopoiia, doing good), → 19.

18 (agathopoios, doing good, one who does good), → 19.

19 ἀγαθός

ἀγαθός (agathos), good (19); ἀγαθοεργέω (agathoergeō), do good (14); ἀγαθοποιέω (agathopoieō), do good (16); ἀγαθοποιός (agathopoios), doing good, one who does good (18); ἀγαθοποιΐα (agathopoiia), doing good (17); ἀγαθωσύνη (agathōsynē), goodness, uprightness, generosity (20).

CL & OT 1. As an adj. in cl. Gk. agathos means serviceable, good, excellent. The subst. to agathon and the pl. ta agatha mean the good or good things that evoke a state of well-being; these may be material, intellectual, moral, or religious, depending on one’s ideal for life. (a) In Gk. philosophy the concept of the good plays a major role. For Plato the idea of the good is the all-embracing, highest, and indeed dominant idea or form. The good is the power that preserves and supports, in contrast to evil, which spoils and destroys. Aristotle applied the good as a formal concept to the totality of human relations. In his Ethics he defines the goal of all action as the attainment of some form of good.

(b) In Hel. thought the ancient humanistic attitude to life was shattered and the predominant meaning of the concept of good once again became religious. According to the Hermetic writings, the salvation brought about by the deity (i.e., deification) is the good. Thus God is the good, for he alone is free from attachment to the material. In Hel. Jud., Philo names moderation, fear of God, and wisdom as the highest possessions by means of which the soul finds the way to God, the highest good.

2. In the Hebrew Bible the concept of the good is indissolubly linked with personal faith in God. The good is always a gift from God and is thus outside the control of human strength (Gen. 3:5). God is the one who is good. This realization is further developed within the OT in the course of a deepening relationship of individuals to God (e.g., Ps. 23:6; 34:10; 84:11). The LXX often translates ṭôb by to agathon and thus approaches the Hel. outlook. God becomes a person’s highest good, and human beings become the recipients of this good in the sense that they acquire a right to good treatment, as long as they regard God as their highest good.

3. That God is the one who is good is made clear in his saving dealings with his chosen people, in his giving of the Mosaic law (Deut. 30:15; Prov. 28:10), in the historical events of the exodus from Egypt (Exod. 18:9), and in the conquest of Canaan (Num 10:29–32). The Israelites found renewed reason for praising God as the one who is good by realizing that everything that comes from him is good, whether it be his work in creation (Gen. 1:18, 31 [note, however, that kalos is used here]), his word (Isa. 39:8), or his Spirit (Ps. 143:10), even if appearances seem to say the opposite (Gen. 50:20).

The constant tension between God’s promises and their incomplete fulfillment was bearable for Israel because they recognized that God’s promises in all their temporal fulfillments always look beyond themselves towards a final, eschatological fulfillment. The good that God has promised his people will come to its real fulfillment in salvation in the end times (see, e.g., Isa. 52:7; Jer. 32:41 = LXX 39:41).

Recognition of the goodness of God could not be taken away from the remnant even by hard, shattering, historical events like the exile. Yet Yahweh’s goodness, his benevolent action in history, had been temporarily withdrawn from Israel. Wisdom literature contains striking expression of the way in which God’s people saw their own limitation without illusion in the presence of the incomprehensible God. They recognized the uncertainty of all life’s values and the vanity of existence (Eccl. 3:12; 5:17), and they saw clearly one’s inability to achieve good (7:20 = LXX 7:21). But in the last analysis even this skepticism could not destroy the knowledge of the goodness of God.

Postexilic Jud. and rab. theology also held firmly to the fact that God is good. God’s goodness brings salvation. It is revealed in his law, which is good. In carrying out God’s law, human beings can now themselves do good and be good. Nevertheless, essential goodness can only be realized in one’s personal relationships with God and one’s fellow human beings (Mic. 6:8; kalos in the LXX).

4. The people at Qumran radicalized this unshaken confidence that good could be achieved into a strict asceticism and linked it with the command to hate forever the sons of wickedness. But here too—as consistently throughout the OT—it is the newly emerging songs of praise that are the genuine expressions of the sect’s piety. They begin and end with the praise of God and his benevolent actions even in the midst of need and oppression. What stands out is what has been asserted in every period of Israel’s history and expressed most completely in the Psalms (e.g., Ps. 16:2; 118:1), namely, that God himself is the one who is really and exclusively good.

NT agathos occurs 102x in all the different types of NT writings (Gospels, Acts, and letters) except Rev. (where kalos does not occur either). The compounds formed with poieō are rare; agathoergeō occurs only twice (Acts 14:17; 1 Tim. 6:18); agathōsynē occurs 4x.

1. Jesus clearly reaffirms the OT statement about God’s essential goodness: No one is good—except God alone (Mk. 10:18; cf. Matt. 19:17; Lk. 18:19). But this does not prevent a natural application of the predicate good to the moral differences among human beings, who do good as well as evil (Matt. 12:35; 25:21; cf. Lk. 6:45; 19:17), an application that includes within it the goodness of God (e.g., Matt. 5:45; 22:10).

But this admission of normal differences and the demand for works of love (see Matt. 5:16, where kalos is used instead of agathos, and 25:31–45) must not be separated from Jesus’ preaching as a whole. Jesus calls sinners to repentance. In this connection it is impossible to ignore the call: Unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven (5:20); be perfect . . . as your heavenly Father is perfect (5:48).

2. Jn. 5:29 proclaims judgment according to works. But this statement too has to be seen within the context of Jesus’ whole message (cf. 10:27–29; 15:5–8). It is only in Christ that we receive a new opportunity of existence. Insofar as we receive a share in God’s goodness, we also can pass on good to others by doing good. According to 10:11, 14, Jesus is the good (kalos) shepherd who lays down his life and makes available the eternal good of redemption (here kalos is a synonym for agathos). In 1:46 the skeptical question posed, "Can anything good (agathon, i.e., salvation) come from [Nazareth]?" is most likely the utterance of a man who could not conceive of the Messiah coming from such an insignificant place as Nazareth.

3. Paul takes up the message of the Synoptic Gospels. He too acknowledges the relative difference between good and evil people. Within God’s sustaining order of things, for example, civil authorities have as their task to maintain law and order and punish evildoers, not those who do good (Rom 13:1–4). The concept agathopoios is similar: Those who do right will receive praise from the authorities (1 Pet. 2:14).

But the distinction that is justified among human institutions breaks down before God. The natural self is irretrievably in bondage to the powers of sin and death and has no right to claim the attribute good. Even for those who are fanatical observers of the Mosaic law, which is good, it only works death for them (Rom 7:18–24; cf. 3:20; 6:23; Gal 3:10–13). But through redemption in Christ goodness overflows to the believer: We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him (Rom. 8:28).

In Christ believers are created for good works (Eph. 2:10) and receive a good conscience (cf. Acts 23:1; 1 Tim. 1:5, 19). This also underlies the urgent exhortations to bear fruit in good works (Col. 1:10), to seek to do good (1 Thess. 5:15), and to do it to everyone (Rom. 15:2; 16:19; Gal. 6:6, 10). Likewise, in several places believers are exhorted to goodness (agathōsynē; see Gal. 5:22; Eph. 5:9; cf. Rom. 15:14). Paul uses agathoergeō in 1 Tim. 6:18 to encourage the wealthy to do good.

Those who do good and seek glory, honor and immortality will receive eternal life (Rom. 2:7). Paul also maintains the concept of judgment according to works (2 Cor. 5:10; Gal. 3:10), though comparison with Rom 8:31–39 is not intended. The gift and the task of the new life are kept in tension, with both aspects fully emphasized.

4. In the remaining NT writings agathopoieō, to do good, is used only in 1 Pet. 2:15, 20; 3:6, 17; 3 Jn. 11; and in Lk. 6:9, 33, 35. agathopoiia, doing good, is employed only in 1 Pet. 4:19. Such right action is the visible proof that a person has really and gratefully grasped the new opportunity for existence as one’s own. In 1 Pet. 3:16, 21, we read of the good conscience that the believer ought to demonstrate to the pagan.

In contrast, Heb. 9:11 and 10:1 lay their emphasis on future, eschatological gifts (cf. 1 Pet. 4:19). In the present age there is a permanent tension between God, who is good and who gives good gifts, and reality, characterized by sin and death, in which the Christian’s life is caught up. It is in this perspective that the promise of Phil. 1:6 stands and has meaning: He who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus. Therefore the warning of Gal. 6:9 also holds good: "Let us not become weary in doing good [kalos], for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up."

See also kalos, good, beautiful, noble (2819); chrēstos, pleasant, kind, good (5982).

20 (agathōsynē, goodness, uprightness, generosity), → 19.

21 (agalliasis, exultation, great joy), → 22.

22 ἀγαλλιάω

ἀγαλλιάω (agalliaō), exult, rejoice greatly, be overjoyed (22); ἀγαλλίασις (agalliasis), exultation, great joy (21).

CL & OT 1. agalliaō, exult, shout for joy, and the corresponding noun agalliasis, exultation, are found only in the LXX, the NT, and writers dependent on them. They are later formations derived from the cl. Gk. agallō and agallomai, to adorn, glorify, revere, boast, enjoy. This is the basic human emotion of joy.

2. In the LXX agalliaō and agalliasis indicate the festive joy that expresses itself publicly over God’s acts of salvation in the past and present (e.g., Ps. 32:11). The significance of these words soon extended beyond the sphere of public worship. agalliaō came to express both corporate and individual attitudes of thankful joy before God (cf. Ps. 9:14; 16:9; 21:1; 31:7; 35:27; 92:4), not only for past experiences of God’s salvation, but for his faithful dealings that are still future (cf. Hab. 3:18), because they are ensured by Yahweh. The rejoicing embraces even the created universe, the silent witness to God’s mighty acts (e.g., the heavens, earth, mountains, islands), which all join in the jubilation (Ps. 19:5; 89:12; 96:11; 97:1). Even God joins in (Isa. 65:19).

Under the prophets during and after the exile, Israel’s rejoicing in God, even in wretched situations, broadened out to include anticipatory gratitude for final salvation and messianic joy (Isa. 61; cf. esp. v. 10). It was in this eschatological direction that the Heb. attitude of thanks and praise reached its profoundest expression (cf. Ps. 126:2, 5; Isa. 25:9).

3. (a) Loud, exultant rejoicing over God’s acts of salvation in the past, present, and future continued as characteristic of the theology and the piety of rab. Jud. The whole aim of the Jew’s life was to glorify God.

(b) By contrast, the Qumran community held that the day of salvation had already begun. In praise and prayer (esp. 1QH; 1QS 10:11) they rejoiced in God, who in his mercy had granted them salvation and given them insight into his secrets.

NT 1. In the NT agalliaō occurs 11x and agalliasis 5x. In the OT exultant rejoicing arises from gratitude and unshakeable trust in the God who has helped and is still helping his people Israel. He will do away with all want and distress in his final act of deliverance at the coming of Messiah. In the NT the rejoicing turns to the God who now in Jesus Christ has already inaugurated the age of salvation and will gloriously complete it on Christ’s return.

(a) In the Gospels there is jubilation even before the coming of Jesus. Zechariah sang for joy when the forerunner of the Lord was born (Lk. 1:14; cf. vv. 1:67–79), and even the child in Elizabeth’s womb shared in the rejoicing (1:44). Jesus spoke of devout Israelites who for a short time rejoiced in the light of John the Baptist (Jn. 5:35). In her song of praise Mary rejoiced that she had been granted a place in God’s saving purpose (Lk. 1:47).

Jesus, the one who brought salvation, not only called on people to rejoice but joined in himself. The Beatitudes conclude with the exhortation: "Rejoice and be glad [agalliaō], because great is your reward in heaven" (Matt. 5:12; cf. Lk. 6:23). Jesus rejoiced because the time of salvation was at hand; it was revealed to babes but at the same time, since it also involved judgment, it was hidden from the wise (Lk. 10:21; cf. Matt. 11:25). Even Abraham rejoiced that he had a part in the day of salvation (Jn. 8:56).

The early church regarded itself as the elect of the last days because of God’s saving work in Jesus Christ. It made his cross, resurrection, and future return the basis of its rejoicing, and thus interpreted David’s joy Christologically (Acts 2:26; cf. Ps. 16:10). The Philippian jailer rejoiced with his whole family because he had come to faith and had been incorporated into the saved community through faith and baptism (Acts 16:34). When the early church believers broke bread, they sang with joy as they anticipated the Parousia of the risen Christ (Acts 2:46).

(b) Paul does not use this word group, but he is no stranger to the idea. He expresses it partly through the vb. kauchaomai, to boast (→ kauchēma, 3017).

(c) In Heb. 1:9 God himself addresses Christ in the words of Ps. 45:7: He anoints his Son with the oil of joy, i.e., with consecrated oil as used at joyous feasts. In Jude 24 the church bows in praise before the one who is able to present us before his glorious presence with great joy. Peter calls on the church to look away from its sufferings in the last days, for they are insignificant in comparison with the rejoicing that will break forth at the end of time (1 Pet. 1:6, 8; 4:13). In Rev. believers are summoned by a voice that cries, "Let us rejoice and be glad [agalliōmen] and give him glory!" (19:7).

2. agalliasis thus becomes the characteristic attitude of the NT church, whose public worship is full of joy, and of the individual Christian. We feel joy through the salvation achieved by Jesus Christ in the past, personally experienced in the present, and confidently expected in the future. Looked at in this way, the sufferings of the present are alleviated. For even though they weigh heavily on us, we have good reason to rejoice.

See also euphrainō, gladden, cheer (up) (2370); chairō, be glad, rejoice (5897).

23 (agamos, unmarried), → 6004.

26 ἀγαπάω

ἀγαπάω (agapaō), to love (26); ἀγάπη (agapē), love (27); ἀγαπητός (agapētos), loved, beloved (28); φιλόστοργος (philostorgos), tenderly loving, affectionate (5816); ἄστοργος (astorgos), without natural affection (845).

CL & OT 1. Cl. Gk. has a number of words for to love—the most important being phileō, stergō, eraō, and agapaō. (a) phileō (→ 5797) is the most general word for love or regard with affection. This vb. denotes the attraction of people to one another who are close together, both inside and outside the family; it includes concern, care, and hospitality, as well as love for things in the sense of being fond of something.

(b) stergō means to love, feel affection, esp. of the mutual love of parents and children. It is also used of the love of a people for their ruler, the love of a tutelary god for the people, and even of a dog for its master. It is less common for the love of husband and wife and does not occur in the NT, apart from the compounds astorgos (Rom. 1:31; 2 Tim. 3:3) and philostorgos (Rom. 12:10).

(c) The vb. eraō and the noun erōs denote the love between man and woman, which embraces longing, craving, and desire. Sensual ecstasy leaves moderation and proportion far behind, and the Gk. tragedies knew the irresistible power of Eros—the god of love bore the same name—that forgot all reason, will, and discretion.

There was also a more mystical understanding of erōs, whereby the Gks. sought to go beyond normal human limitations in order to attain perfection. The fertility cults, of course, glorified the generating Eros in nature, and the mystery religions had rites intended to unite participants with the godhead. Here spiritual and psychical unity with the god came into the foreground more and more, however much erotic pictures and symbols were used. Plato and Aristotle sought to raise spiritual love above the physical. For them erōs was the striving for righteousness, self-possession, and wisdom; it was the embodiment of the good, the way to attain immortality.

(d) Though the vb. agapaō appears frequently in Gk. lit., the noun agapē is a late word. Only one reference has been found outside the biblical and related lit., in a papyrus document that gives the goddess Isis the title agapē. agapaō is colorless as a word, appearing frequently as a synonym with eraō and phileō and meaning to be fond of, treat respectfully, be pleased with, welcome. When, on rare occasions, it refers to someone favored by a god, it is clear that, unlike eraō, it is not our longing for worth that is meant, but a generous move by one for the sake of the other. Such a notion is expressed above all in the way agapētos is used, mostly of an only child to whom all the love of the parents is given.

2. In the LXX agapaō is the preferred word to translate the Heb. vb. ʾāhēb. The noun agapē finds its origin here to translate the corresponding Heb. noun (the vb. occurs far more frequently than the noun). The vb. can refer to both persons and things and denotes both human relationships with each other and God’s relationship with us.

(a) Love and hate represent two of the basic polarized attitudes to life. The phenomenon of love in the OT is experienced as a spontaneous force that drives one to something or someone over against itself. agapē means the vital urge of the sexes for one another (cf. Hos. 3:1; 4:18; Jer. 2:25; Ezek. 16:37). The powerful perception of marital love as an enriching gift derives both from Gen 2:18–24 and esp. from Song of Songs, which celebrates the strength of passionate love: Love is as strong as death, its jealousy unyielding as the grave. Its burns like blazing fire, like a mighty flame (Song 8:6).

(b) The blood relationship with father and mother and the spiritual bond between friends is also described by agapē. Heb. does not distinguish between the ideas conveyed by eraō and agapaō. Thus, the friendship love of Jonathan and David for one another is expressed in terms of a communal fellowship deeper than love for a woman (2 Sam. 1:26; cf. 1 Sam. 18:1, 3; 20:17 in A).

(c) In a further sense, love lies at the root of social community life: Love your neighbor as yourself (Lev. 19:18). Love in this context means devotion towards one’s neighbors for their sake, accepting them as brothers and sisters and letting them come into their own. This aspect is illustrated by social legislation that is esp. concerned with the rights of aliens (19:34), the poor (cf. 25:35), and orphans.

3. The word love in the OT is used less commonly and with greater caution to describe the relationship between God and human beings. In this respect the OT contrasts with Gk. lit. in being far removed from any mystical thinking. In the OT humanity can never ascend to God; rather, all human thought, feeling, action, and worship are a response to a previous movement by God. Thus, the LXX prefers the simpler word agapē to the more loaded erōs.

(a) At the beginning of the OT stands not only the God who loves, but also the God who elects and who acts directly in nature for the sake of his people, with whom he has made a covenant (Exod. 24). The great deeds of Yahweh are the deeds of his history with his people, such as the exodus, the gift of the land, and the Torah. Righteousness, faithfulness, love, and grace are some of the concepts embodied in such actions. The people reply with jubilation, praise, and obedience.

God’s judgment and grace permeate the entire OT. God holds to his covenant, despite Israel’s frequent relapses, which draw God’s wrath on them. The only ground for this is to be found in his electing grace and love (e.g., Hos. 11:1). Statements concerning this devotion of God to his people reach the level of suffering love (cf. Isa. 53, where such love is prophesied of the coming Servant of the Lord).

(b) The prophets elaborated on the theme of God’s love as the main motif of his electing work. It was an enormity of unique proportions for Hosea, surrounded by the Canaanite world of sexual fertility cults and love feasts, to represent the relationship between Yahweh and his people as that of a deceived husband and a prostitute. Yet, despite the fact that Israel had broken the covenant and thus become an adulteress, Yahweh wooed back his faithless wife, the godless covenant people, with an inconceivable love (cf. Hos 2:19–20).

Besides using this picture of marriage, Hosea also used the picture of a father to describe Yahweh’s unfathomable love for Israel, whom he loved in Egypt and drew to himself with bonds of love (11:1–4). But Israel turned away. So Hosea pictured the struggle going on inside Yahweh himself as that between the jealous wrath of a deceived father and his glowing love (see 11:8–9). This description by Hosea of the passionate and zealous love of God is unprecedented in its boldness. The Godness of God does not express itself in destructive power, but in tender and compassionate love, which precedes any responsive human love and suffers through the faithlessness of his people (6:4).

The later prophets took over, with modifications, Hosea’s picture of love and the theme of the beloved. Jeremiah spoke of Israel’s first love in the desert and of its growing cold in the promised land (2:1–8). But Yahweh’s love is everlasting (31:3 = LXX 38:3), and he will help the degenerate people again (cf. 3:6–10; 31:4). In Isa 54:4–8 it is not the wife who has left her husband but Yahweh who has left his young bride, to whom he now again turns in compassion. One can even speak of Yahweh’s political love, recognized in the return of the exiles from Babylon (43:4).

(c) Deut. expresses similar ideas. But whereas in the prophets Yahweh’s love is the sole and incredible basis for his future actions in saving his lost people, the allusions to Yahweh’s electing love in Deut. always provide the ground for exhorting Israel to love God and to follow his directing (Deut 7:6–11). This theme is summarized in 6:5: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. Such love for God is realized in keeping the covenant law (Exod. 20:6; Deut 10:12–13) and in loving one’s neighbor (Lev. 19:18; cf. 19:34 as an example).

4. (a) In Hel. and rab. Jud. agapē became the central concept for describing God’s relationship with his people and vice versa. God loves his people through every distress. Proof of his love is the Torah, and the believer reciprocates God’s love by obeying his law, emulating God’s zealous compassion, and remaining true to him, even to the point of martyrdom (4 Macc. 13:24; 15:3). Loving one’s neighbor is the chief commandment to the pious Jew. There are even examples of commands to help one’s enemy.

(b) The Qumran community believed it had been chosen in God’s love, but this love referred only to the children of light. God loves the angel of light and hates all who belong to the company of Belial. There is an often repeated command: Love everyone whom God elects, hate everyone he hates (1QS 1:3–4; cf. Matt 5:43–47). Since God’s love is not conceived as having universal application, even love for one’s neighbor is restricted to members of the sacred community.

NT 1. (a) In the NT love is one of the central ideas that express the whole content of the Christian faith (cf. Jn. 3:16). God’s activity is love, which looks for a reciprocal love from people (1 Jn. 4:8, 16).

(b) It is significant that stergō occurs only 3x in the NT, once in the compound philostorgos, loving with devotion, in a section in which Paul emphasizes the need for love in the church by piling up words for love: Be devoted to one another in brotherly love (Rom. 12:10). stergō also occurs in Rom. 1:31; 2 Tim. 3:3 in the compound astorgos, heartless, without love. Moreover, erōs and eraō do not occur at all. The reason for this is presumably that the anthropocentric way of thinking that is bound up with these words does not correspond with the NT approach.

phileō, on the other hand (→ 5797), appears frequently, both by itself and in compound words. But it remains a more limited and colorless word. The main emphasis of this word group is on love for people who are closely connected, either by blood or by faith (e.g., Jn. 11:36; 15:19; 16:27).

agapaō and phileō are used synonymously in Jn. 3:35 and 5:20 (cf. 16:27) of the Father’s love for the Son, and in 21:15–17, when Jesus asks Peter whether he loves him and in Peter’s reply. In 1 Cor. 16:22 phileō is clearly used of love for the Lord Jesus: If anyone does not love the Lord—a curse be on him. Come, O Lord!

(c) By contrast, agapē and agapaō are used in nearly every case in the NT to speak of God’s relationship with us—not unexpectedly, in view of the OT usage. Where agapē is obviously directed toward things (cf. Lk. 11:43), the very use of the vb. agapaō is intended to make it plain that love here is directed to the wrong ends, i.e., not toward God. Thus the vb. is used of misdirected love in Jn. 3:19 (love of darkness), 12:43 (love of human glory), and 2 Tim. 4:10 (love of the present age).

In the case of the noun agapē there is no corresponding negative usage in the NT. It is always in