The Concise New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis

By Christopher A. Beetham and Zondervan

The Exegesis Quick-Reference Tool Every Pastor, Teacher, Student, and Scholar Needs

The Concise New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis (CNIDNTTE) by Christopher A. Beetham is a significant resource for those looking for a quick-reference guide to aid in exegesis and interpretation. It retains all the essentials of the monumental and magisterial New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis edited by Moises Silva, bringing together its most important elements into one accessible volume. This reference includes the most vital, relevant information needed to delve deep into the study of the Greek words used in Scripture for study of the New Testament--its texts and theology.

This volume offers a wealth of background and information on the meaning of Greek words in the New Testament, as well as related usage in classical Greek sources, the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint), and extrabiblical Second Temple Jewish literature. This significant tool offers the following features:

• All the nearly 800 entries covering over 3,000 Greek words found in the full edition are included and presented in the same order and arrangement
• Retains approximately 60 percent of the original edition, with the emphasis now on synchronic word study and usage in the Greek Old Testament, extrabiblical Second Temple literature, and especially the New Testament
• The unique arrangement according to Greek words and use of English concepts is retained from the full edition and allows all users to access Greek terms regardless of their level of competence in Greek.
• This edition retains the significant semantic-domain tool that directs the reader to all the Greek words that have something to do with a particular English word or concept. For example, under the English words "Resurrection," there is a list of four Greek words that are related to that topic.
• Discussions reflect the latest in modern scholarship
• Bibliographies retain essential references to other standard lexicons and theological dictionaries

The Concise New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis is the ideal tool for pastors, Bible teachers, students, and scholars engaging in exegesis. It is packed with the essential information needed to study the New Testament.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Zondervan
• Release date: Dec 14, 2021
• ISBN: 9780310598480

Book preview

Introduction to the Present Volume

The present volume serves as a condensed, one-volume edition of Moisés Silva’s five-volume New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis, published in 2014 by Zondervan (henceforth NIDNTTE). The goal of this present volume is to make the riches of NIDNTTE accessible to a wider audience. The current volume retains approximately 55 to 60% of NIDNTTE. It differs only in the size of the articles—all the articles and features of NIDNTTE have otherwise been fully retained.¹

So, what has been cut to condense the material to the size found in the present volume?

First, the bibliographies have been deleted, save for the references to the relevant material in other standard reference works, including TDNT, EDNT, Spicq, TDOT, and NIDOTTE (with occasional references to others). These references are found immediately at the end of the article.

Second, the Greco-Roman sections (labeled GL in the essays) are trimmed down, keeping only the most significant or relevant information. Etymological discussions were normally found here, and these have been largely removed.

Third, most discussions of the relevant terms and concepts in the literature of rabbinic Judaism have been cut. These works were written after the New Testament period (many of them centuries later), though of course many of the traditions found in these works originate much earlier than the time of composition, including the traditions found in the Mishnah (written ca. AD 200). The challenge is to know what does in fact originate from the first-century context or earlier and thus serves as relevant information for understanding the New Testament. Scholars do not doubt that the Mishnah contains material that dates to the time of Jesus and even before. The question is which material. Therefore, due to the difficult issues that surround the use of this material to understand the New Testament, the decision has been made to remove most of it.

Fourth, extended discussion of the various interpretations that scholars offer for a difficult or significant passage have been trimmed. The reader is urged to consult an academic commentary for a fuller account of the interpretive options in such cases (e.g., the Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament series).

Fifth, discussions of the use of a word in gnostic or New Testament apocryphal literature, as well as the writings of the church fathers, are normally deleted, as all these writings date later than the New Testament documents and are therefore of less value in determining the meaning of a word in the first-century context than, say, the writings of Philo and Josephus, to which references are largely retained.

Sixth, discussions of scholarly debate concerning authorship of a biblical book, putative sources (e.g., JEDP), or the authenticity or inauthenticity of a logion or pericope have been mostly eliminated except when necessary for the argument at hand. Similarly, text-critical discussions have been retained only when necessary to substantiate a significant exegetical or theological point.

Seventh, NIDNTTE often and liberally provided the reading of the biblical text for the convenience of the reader. Many of these have been deleted for economy. Yet the references have been retained so that readers can easily look up the verses for themselves should they desire to do so.

How to Use This Work

There are a few different ways to locate desired material found in this reference work. The work is arranged as a dictionary (or lexicon), and the Greek words considered are listed in alphabetical order. The headers at the top of the page employ the headwords for the articles, so a reader who knows Greek can quickly look up the desired word in its alphabetical ordering, using the headers for quick reference, in order to see if an article exists on that word. Yet this first approach will not work in every case to locate a given entry, and a few more words of instruction must be offered to help the reader navigate the present volume so as to be able to fully access its riches.

The volume is not exhaustive. The work provides nearly 800 articles covering over 3,000 of the approximately 5,400 different words that occur in the Greek New Testament. Instead, exegetically and theologically significant words have been selected and function as headwords of the work, often clustered together with their word groups and explored together with them in the articles. (The word groups normally include derivatives, cognates, and compounds.) Therefore, to find the article that examines the meaning of a Greek word that does not serve as the headword of an entry, one need only locate the desired word in the List of Greek Words on pages xxv–lviii and find there the headword under which the desired word is discussed. The reader may then turn to that headword entry and peruse it to find where their word is considered.

For example, say I wish to study the meaning of φιλάγαθος found in Titus 1:8. I look the word up in alphabetical order in the present volume (using the headers at the top of the page for quick reference), but I don’t find an article devoted to it. Now what? I turn to the List of Greek Words and locate φιλάγαθος twice on page lvi. I see that φιλάγαθος is mentioned under two essays—ἀγαθός and φιλέω. I look these headwords up and read each essay, thus learning about φιλάγαθος within each overall word group.

I then note at the top of the respective essays for ἀγαθός (p. 6) and φιλέω (p. 942) that a Concept is listed: the word ἀγαθός lists Good and Possessions as the concepts to which its word group contributes, while φιλέω lists Avarice; Debate, Quarrel; Friend; Glory; Good; Love; Please as concepts to which the φιλέω word group contributes. If desired, I can then proceed to the List of Concepts on pages lix–cxiv to discover other Greek words whose meanings contribute to those semantic domains and concepts. I can peruse those articles too, especially the one or two that seem most relevant to the study at hand (Titus 1:8), providing me ultimately not merely with a word study of a single word but an overview of all the words of a particular semantic domain. Along the way I will have discovered several others biblical texts that touch on the same concept(s) and inform my study of Titus 1:8.

Another way to locate desired information is when a reader approaches the work with interest in an overall concept or theme of the New Testament (e.g., food, kingdom, righteousness, zeal). For this type of search, the reader is encouraged to look up his or her topic of interest in the List of Concepts. A list of the most relevant Greek words pertaining to that theme will be found. The reader can then look up the listed word or words in the main body of the work (using the List of Greek Words as necessary).

Readers with little or no Greek can still navigate the volume. How? All Greek words are listed with their respective G number. The G number is shorthand for a given Greek word’s assigned Goodrick-Kohlenberger number (sometimes labeled as the G/K number in other publications). The Goodrick-Kohlenberger classification system assigns sequential numbers to all words used in the Greek New Testament in their alphabetical ordering. So the first Greek word that would be listed in a standard Greek lexicon is assigned the G number 1, the second word would be assigned the G number 2, etc.² The system resembles the older Strong’s numbering system still in use today. If a reader has come across a Greek word in their study that has an assigned Strong’s number and wants to locate that word in the present volume, they need only to find their word’s Strong’s number in the back index titled the Strong to Goodrick-Kohlenberger Number Conversion Chart, identify the relevant G number, and then look up that word in its sequential, numbered order, using the List of Greek Words mentioned immediately above as necessary.

A reader may be interested in finding material related to a particular passage of Scripture. A robust Scripture index is placed in the back of the work so that a reader can quickly locate the pages on which a particular passage is mentioned.

Most essays in the present volume offer a representative, and not exhaustive, sample of uses of a given word in the Greek New Testament. The reader is therefore highly encouraged to use an exhaustive concordance together with the present volume for a full study of a word. For those who know Greek, Kohlenberger, Goodrick, and Swanson’s Exhaustive Concordance to the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995) remains an excellent and inexpensive option.³ For those who know little to no Greek, Kohlenberger’s NIV Exhaustive Bible Concordance, 3rd edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2015) would be of great help. Both employ the G (or G/K) numbers. To locate all the uses of a Greek word in the Greek Old Testament (the LXX), Edwin Hatch and Henry A. Redpath’s A Concordance to the Septuagint, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998) remains useful. For those preferring a digital option, Bible software platforms exist that are immensely helpful for conducting word searches across the LXX and the Greek New Testament and can save hours of time.

For further information (and to get the most out of this work), the reader is strongly encouraged to read the original introduction to NIDNTTE found in the immediately following pages.

Notes

1. The present volume has also updated its style to conform to the latest edition of the SBL Handbook of Style, 2nd ed. (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2014).

2. The G/K system also assigns a number to every Hebrew word in the Hebrew Bible, an H number.

3. Though note that this concordance is based on the NA²⁶–²⁷/UBS⁴ critical edition of the Greek New Testament, not the NA²⁸/UBS⁵; thirty-three differences exist between the two editions, all in the Catholic Epistles. The differences between the two editions are laid out on pages 50–51* of the introduction of NA²⁸.

Introduction to Moisés Silva’s New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis, 2nd Edition

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, edited by Colin Brown, was published in three volumes in 1975–78 (a reissue in 1986 included a fourth volume consisting of indexes) and quickly established itself as a standard reference work, with almost 80,000 copies (print and electronic) having been sold during the past thirty-five years. NIDNTT was a translation, revision, and expansion of Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament (Theological Concept-Lexicon to the New Testament, 2nd ed., 2 vols. [1970–71; rev. ed. in one vol., 2010]), which had been produced by over seventy German academics and pastors under the editorship of Lothar Coenen and others.

The English edition included contributions from more than a dozen British and American scholars who wrote new articles and expanded existing ones. Brown himself was responsible for a large amount of new material. The present edition, consisting of a thorough reorganization and revision, is now entitled New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis (NIDNTTE, suggesting a kinship with the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis [NIDOTTE], 5 vols., ed. William Van Gemeren [1997]).

1. General Revisions

As would be expected, the bibliographies have been updated (but also streamlined), and inaccurate or misleading information has been corrected. In addition, biblical quotations as a rule follow the NIV (2011 ed.), with frequent references to the NRSV for the purpose of comparison (occasionally other versions are mentioned as well).

Being the work of many contributors, the original edition was characterized by considerable variation and inconsistencies, especially in the presentation of linguistic data from general Greek literature and from the Septuagint. A special effort has therefore been made to bring greater uniformity to the material; the resulting changes should facilitate the work of readers who wish to compare the usage of several terms.

The original German work and the first English edition were produced during a period when the figure of Rudolf Bultmann loomed large over NT scholarship. Thus the contributors interacted extensively with him, as well as with other prominent writers of the mid-twentieth century. Some of these discussions are less relevant today and have therefore been shortened or even omitted in the present edition, but it seemed wise to maintain a measure of continuity with the original NIDNTT by retaining material that still contributes to our understanding of Greek usage and NT concepts. On a selective basis, these discussions have received brief updating. (Although the revising editor assumes responsibility for the final form of this edition, readers should not infer that the views expressed throughout the work necessarily reflect his own opinions.)

The revision has involved not only numerous omissions, additions (including new articles), and alterations of various sorts, but also extensive rewriting—so much so that it seemed inappropriate to retain the names of the original authors after each article. Of course, the present edition would have been impossible without their contribution, in recognition of which a list of their names is included below.

Other kinds of revisions and features require more detailed explanation, as follows.

2. Structure

The most distinctive feature of NIDNTT, reflected in the German title, was its organization of the material on the basis of concepts rather than by following the traditional method of dealing with Greek words alphabetically (as, e.g., in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament [TDNT], ed. G. Kittel and G. Friedrich, 10 vols. [1964–76]). Thus under the concept Come, for instance, we find separate articles on three Greek word groups (ἔρχομαι, καταντάω, μέλλω, with their cognates). The rationale behind this decision was no doubt the growing linguistic interest in the study of vocabulary according to semantic fields or domains, coupled by the related concern that the usual method often leads to an atomistic approach—discussing an individual Greek word in isolation from semantically associated terms and therefore ignoring important passages that are relevant for the theological topic under purview but that do not happen to include the word chosen for study.

Unfortunately, the adoption of a new structure by the Theologisches Begriffslexikon, and thereafter by NIDNTT, was not sufficient to transcend the basic problem. Some of the articles did have helpful introductory paragraphs, but these were much too brief and sketchy. In addition, the concepts that served as entries were merely German/ English headings, not true semantic fields, while the number of Greek terms discussed under each concept was much too small, and the Greek terms chosen were not always semantically connected but had some other kind of association (e.g., the adverb ὀπίσω, after, was discussed under the heading Disciple). Most important, the articles themselves, with rare exceptions, discussed each term (with its cognates) in isolation from the other terms listed under the concept; in fact, different words within the same semantic field were usually treated by different authors. What we find, therefore, is largely a physical, not a semantic, grouping of the words discussed. Moreover, the reality is that most users of so-called theological dictionaries of the Bible are motivated by interest in a particular word at a time, and many of them find the conceptual grouping an inconvenience in locating the discussion of that word.

The present edition reverts to an alphabetical organization, but it preserves—indeed, enhances—the distinctive interest in conceptual groupings by the use of several new features.

(1) In the first place, the body of the work is preceded by a comprehensive List of Concepts. This register parallels the organization of the material in the first edition, but with three significant improvements: (a) it provides a fuller (though still not exhaustive) catalog of concepts; (b) it includes a much larger number of cross-references that lead the user to antonyms and to other terms with looser semantic associations; and (c) it lists, under each concept, a far greater number of Greek terms (plus a brief English gloss), with a link to the appropriate articles in the case of terms that receive separate discussion. It should be noted that this list provides a modest catalog of semantic fields, though with no pretensions that it is a scientific arrangement (such as is attempted in J. P. Louw and E. A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, 2 vols., 2nd ed. [1989], a work that contributed greatly to the present dictionary). Moreover, the list can serve, again in a modest way, as a partial English-Greek dictionary of NT terms.

(2) In the body of the work each article lists all cognates found in the NT, followed by an indication of the concept(s) to which the word group belongs. This information is linked to the List of Concepts so that the user can quickly identify the other word groups that either occupy the same semantic field or are otherwise related to it.

(3) To a greater degree than is usual in theological dictionaries, the articles themselves from time to time call attention to semantic relationships between the word group being discussed and other lexical items. For practical reasons these comments are usually brief—and often merely suggestive—but in selected articles substantial discussion of synonyms is provided (see, e.g., ἀγαθός, ἀγαπάω, καινός).

In short, the reorganization of the material on the basis of the alphabetization of Greek words does not represent an abandonment of the original conception. On the contrary, the group of changes implemented in the present edition should greatly facilitate using the material in a way that avoids treating words in isolation. (It should be added that an alphabetical organization was already implemented in the one-volume abridgment of NIDNTT produced by Verlyn Verbrugge, The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words [2000]. I am greatly indebted to this volume, and many of its changes have been incorporated in the present edition.)

3. Theological Lexicography

Theological dictionaries of biblical words are odd creatures and, as such, susceptible to being misused. The term dictionary (sometimes lexicon) in its stricter sense refers to a linguistic resource that provides semantic definitions of words (alongside other linguistic information, such as inflected forms, pronunciations, etymology, etc.). An encyclopedia, by contrast, provides information about things (including people and concepts) and is thus primarily extralinguistic in character. To be sure, the distinction is not absolute, and one often finds some overlapping: a dictionary, when defining an object in the physical world, may resort to giving a description of that object; conversely, an encyclopedia may include a definition of the article’s headword as an introduction to the broader description. It is true as well that the English word dictionary is sometimes applied to reference works that are not linguistic in character (e.g., dictionaries of biography, of the history of ideas, of philosophy, etc.), and typically such works have little, if anything, to say about word usage.

In this latter sense, a theological dictionary of the Bible would consist of English entries—such as Ethics, God, Sin, etc.—and the articles would bring together a great variety of relevant passages, even if these passages did not contain the entry words. In fact, the typical Bible dictionary does precisely that (some of them, but not all, include brief linguistic information about the corresponding Greek and Hebrew words). Beginning with TDNT, however, the linguistic and the encyclopedic were merged; e.g., the article on παιδεία (training, instruction) not only discusses the meaning of this word (and its cognates) but also includes much information on the nature of education in ancient Greece. (The precursor to TDNT, Hermann Cremer’s Biblisch-theologisches Wörterbuch der neutestamentlichen Gräcität [1866], focused on the linguistic task of comparing biblical and extrabiblical usage. See further M. Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics, rev. ed. [1994], 22–28.)

The awkward consequences and perils of this methodological conflation have been clearly documented (beginning with J. Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language [1961], ch. 8) and need not be repeated here. It can hardly be doubted, however, that TDNT and comparable reference works continue to provide a distinctive and valuable approach to the study of Scripture. The challenge is to minimize its problems. The present edition seeks to do so not only by the attention it pays to broader semantic relations (see above, 2. Structure) but also by the way the material is covered. While avoiding an artificial separation between linguistic and conceptual data, the two are distinguished as carefully as is feasible—e.g., by separating them in the presentation of the data when appropriate, by making a special effort to avoid ambiguity in the discussion of specific instances, and occasionally by alerting the user to invalid inferences.

The question remains, however, whether it is justifiable to produce theological dictionaries in which most of the terms covered are not theological at all. A relatively small percentage of the NT vocabulary consists of terms that have developed a specialized Christian sense (e.g., ἁμαρτία, sin; σάρξ, flesh; χάρις, grace). The same is true of specialized vocabulary in other bodies of literature (e.g., only a fraction of the words used by Plato may be regarded as technical or semitechnical philosophical terms). Specialized terms are highly referential (cf. proper names, whose semantic value is not strongly affected by how they are used); as such, they are able by themselves to convey a considerable amount of semantic information, as in the case of νόμος when this word has the specialized sense the Mosaic law. (See further Silva, Biblical Words, 101–8.)

While most of the words in the NT are not of this type, even nontheological terms are often found in theological contexts. The value of a theological dictionary is that it can offer exegetical discussion of such contexts by focusing on one word at a time. The point, then, is not necessarily that the word in question has acquired its own theological significance, but rather that there is a special benefit in assessing how that word is functioning in theological contexts. Good commentaries, of course, include discussions of this type through a running exposition of the passage. A theological dictionary, by bringing together the theological passages where the word is found, is able to provide a richer, more systematic exposition of the lexical material.

4. Linguistic Data

Those familiar with NIDNTT will notice that this revision features significant changes in the presentation and discussion of linguistic details, especially in the following areas.

(1) General Greek usage. The first section in each article is now abbreviated GL, for General (Greek) Literature, and it covers more fully not only the classical period in the stricter sense but also preclassical, Hellenistic, and Roman times. Some of the original articles presented a substantial amount of information in this area while others were sketchy. One of the main goals of the revision has been to strengthen and bring uniformity to this coverage. Although the Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek-English Lexicon (LSJ) continues to provide most of the initial data, several improvements have been made. (a) Examination of relevant passages has resulted in occasional refinements to the semantic structuring and glosses of the LSJ articles. (b) Extensive use has been made of the electronic Thesaurus linguae graecae (TLG) to confirm as well as to enrich the material; other resources (such as journal articles, the Diccionario griego-español [ed. F. R. Adrados et al., 1980– ], etymological dictionaries, etc.) have also been consulted. (c) In numerous cases, when it seemed especially appropriate, not just the references but actual quotations from Greek literature, accompanied by English translation, have been provided.

In this connection we should briefly consider the value, as well as the dangers, of paying attention to the history of the Greek language prior to the NT (this approach is often referred to as diachronic). The meaning that a word or some other linguistic unit has for a community of speakers can be established only by reference to how that word functions in said community (the synchronic approach). Prior meanings, if different from contemporary usage, are irrelevant unless there is reason to believe that the speaker/hearer is aware of them. Thus, e.g., the fact that English conversation used to mean conduct has no bearing on the word’s present sense (unless the speaker, perhaps familiar with the KJV or other Elizabethan literature, is aware of such an earlier sense and wishes to exploit it for some reason); if a foreign student were to ask about the meaning of this word as used in a modern newspaper, it would be unhelpful and even misleading to bring up the sense conduct. (See further Silva, Biblical Words, ch. 1.)

Why then include a discussion of classical Greek when we are interested in the meaning of words in NT times? In the first place, the amount of Greek literature from the early Roman period that has survived, though considerable, does not by any means represent fully the state of the vocabulary at the time. Many terms and meanings that are attested only in the classical period surely continued to be used in Greco-Roman times, and it is merely an accident of history that they are not found in later extant literature. In not a few instances, a particular NT usage can be paralleled only once or twice in writings produced centuries earlier.

Second, the NT writers were hardly ignorant of the literary tradition distinctive of ancient Greece. Admittedly, we know almost nothing about the education of these authors (with the exception of Paul), and they represent a broad range of literacy; certainly, no one would suggest, e.g., that the author of Mark read Demosthenes and Plato for recreation. Nevertheless, classical writings continued to exercise influence in the Roman period, and it is unlikely that the NT authors were completely insulated from them.

Third, even those classical usages that have had no effect on the NT language are of importance simply because they form part of the broader linguistic background to the period, providing the biblical student with a proper general framework within which to understand the text. There is a correspondence between such data and other kinds of historical information that are acknowledged to be significant or even crucial for NT interpretation. Even though the biblical writers never mention Alexander the Great or the Seleucid rulers, acquaintance with the Hellenistic period sheds valuable light on Jewish society of the first century, which in turn allows us to understand the Gospels more clearly. Again, commentaries on the Corinthian letters routinely give information about the history of Corinth, not because one can demonstrate a connection between some specific historical datum and a Pauline sentence, but because knowledge of that history provides a more authentic perspective on the situation addressed by Paul. Likewise, a rare lexical meaning in the Iliad, or even the identification of a Proto-Indo-European etymology, while irrelevant in any direct way for the determination of semantic usage in the NT, expands our knowledge base and therefore assists us in drawing accurate inferences.

(2) Greek (and Semitic) usage in Jewish writings. Instead of using the abbreviation OT for the second section of each article, the present edition uses JL, denoting Jewish Literature. This change does not indicate that less attention is being paid to the Hebrew Bible and its theological formulations but rather that the section covers, when appropriate, a broader range of literature, including the Greek version(s) of the Hebrew Bible, the Pseudepigrapha, Jewish Hellenistic authors (esp. Philo and Josephus), Qumran, and rabbinic writings (this broad coverage is found in the first edition as well, but with less consistency).

In particular, a special effort has been made to present the usage of Greek words in the Septuagint (LXX)—with reference to their respective Hebrew/Aramaic equivalents—in a clear and uniform manner. This work has been greatly facilitated not only by the availability of electronic tools that were nonexistent in the 1970s, but also by the recent appearance of LXX lexicons (see LEH and Muraoka in the list of abbreviations) and other valuable publications (e.g., A New English Translation of the Septuagint [NETS]).

Now in determining the meaning of words in the LXX, one is often pulled in two different directions: (a) its peculiar character as translation literature suggests that the underlying Semitic text (or Vorlage) in many instances would have affected the translators’ lexical usage; but (b) the fact that it was intended to be used by people who read Greek suggests that normal usage (as attested generally in nontranslation literature) should be the determinative factor. In the present work we have sought to strike a reasonable balance. As in so many other questions involving interpretation, sensitivity to each specific context should receive priority. The starting point in each case is to assume that words are being used according to standard usage, and thus one must not be too quick to attribute to them the meaning of the underlying Hebrew or Aramaic term. At the same time, flexibility is key: one must remain open to the possibility that semantic interference (a powerful force in bilingual settings) has played a role in the translation process. In short, if the standard meaning of a Greek word appears to clash with the context (e.g., the conceptual thrust of the passage, or the particular syntagmatic combination, or the presence of synonyms and antonyms belonging to a different semantic field), it is appropriate to infer that the sense of the term has undergone a change.

(It should be noted that the name Septuagint and its abbreviation LXX are shorthand for a collection of books that includes more than one Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible [or parts thereof], as well as writings known as the Apocrypha [or Deuterocanonical Books], and a few that are usually classified under the category of Pseudepigrapha. Some scholars prefer to use the abbreviation OG [Old Greek] or the combined siglum LXX/ OG as a reminder of the complexity of the Greek Jewish Scriptures. LXX in the present work should be understood as virtually equivalent to the collection found in A. Rahlfs’s Septuaginta and in A New English Translation of the Septuagint, except that the latter includes the so-called Alpha Text of Esther and excludes the book of Odes [note that both of these publications include the Psalms of Solomon, a work usually classified as part of the Pseudepigrapha]. The more reliable Greek text and critical apparatus of the incomplete Göttingen Septuaginta have been consulted in cases of textual uncertainty.)

(3) New Testament usage. Little needs to be said under this heading. We are well served with regard to the linguistic study of the NT vocabulary, especially in view of the Louw-Nida dictionary, which is organized according to semantic fields, and Danker’s revision of the Bauer Lexicon (see respectively LN and BDAG in the list of abbreviations). When describing NT Greek usage, the present work relies heavily on BDAG, but the latter’s semantic classifications have not always been followed precisely; moreover, an attempt has been made to build on the data summarized in the GL and JL sections of the articles, so that the presentation of the material provides a different perspective. Note further that, when appropriate, everyday meanings and theological uses are handled separately; one often finds, however, that an everyday meaning occurs in a theologically significant passage, and in such cases a split in the discussion would have been artificial, adding unnecessary complexity.

5. Statistics

One of the areas of language usage where the present edition seeks to be more consistent is in the presentation of statistical data. Some caveats are necessary, however.

(1) In the case of extrabiblical writings (other than those mentioned under JL below), it is difficult to come up with reliable figures. Our primary resource for this large body of literature is the TLG, which includes morphological tagging, making it possible to give totals for specific lemmata (regardless of their various forms); but when a form is ambiguous, which happens frequently, the searches will produce false hits and thus inaccurate totals. Moreover, the TLG does not include papyrological and inscriptional data; such materials can be accessed through other means (e.g., the Papyrological Navigator at http://www.papyri.info/ and the Packard Humanities Institute website at http://epigraphy.packhum.org/), but these are not exhaustive and do not provide morphological tagging. As a result, the present work describes usage frequency in extrabiblical literature mostly in general and relative terms (e.g., rare, infrequent, frequent). Such inexact descriptions, however, may prove more valuable than precise-sounding figures, which can sometimes be misleading (see below).

(2) Under the Jewish Literature (JL) section in each article, it is possible to be more precise, since morphologically tagged texts are available for the Hebrew Bible, the LXX, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Philo, Josephus, and most of the Pseudepigrapha. Even here, however, we face some obstacles. Because our main concern in the JL discussion is the LXX, we should note the following problems. (a) The morphological tagging is not perfect, either because of occasional remaining errors or because there may be a legitimate difference of opinion in the analysis of a form. (b) The available electronic tools are based on Rahlfs’s Septuaginta and do not take into account a large number of textual variants, many of which have a claim to being original readings (the Göttingen Septuaginta is far from complete and thus also inadequate for providing totals). (c) A decision needs to be made in the case of books where two separate Greek versions exist, mainly Judges, Tobit, and Daniel (the Alpha Text of Esther is not included in Rahlfs). Users may notice that in the present work totals are usually smaller than those given in LEH because the latter evidently counts items twice when they appear in those books; moreover, the LEH figures include Odes, which we do not treat here as an independent book. (d) Statistics for Greek-Hebrew equivalents are based on the Tov-Polak Parallel-Aligned Greek-Hebrew Old Testament, used by various electronic programs; though far more reliable than previous efforts (esp. the Hatch-Redpath Concordance to the Septuagint), this tool too reflects judgments that are debatable at times.

(3) It is true also in the case of the NT that we have to be cognizant of textual variation. The figures given in the present work are based on the text of NA²⁷ (= UBS⁴; the few differences in the NA²⁸ text do not affect the totals); selected references to variants are provided as well.

Because of the problems mentioned above, we have almost always qualified frequency numbers with the abbreviation c. (about)—even in many cases where there is good reason to think that the figure is accurate—as a reminder of the ambiguities inherent in statistical data. In particular, it would be unwise to draw any conclusions on the basis of relatively small differences in usage frequency. Some scholars, in fact, question the wisdom of including any statistics at all in lexicographical studies, but to dispense with this kind of information would be a classic case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. While statistics are often misused, they can prove helpful in giving a general picture of distribution.

It may be going too far to say that frequency as such is a semantic component, but determining whether a word occurs in certain broad contexts, and if so how often, tells us something about its collocation (how it combines with other lexical items). Now the term collocation is normally applied to small linguistic units, such as phrases and clauses, but it is a fair extension of this usage to take into account the more general context, i.e., whether a word is more likely to be found in a particular author (e.g., Paul rather than John), or in a particular group of authors (e.g., the Synoptics rather than the writers of the General Epistles), or within a particular literary genre (e.g., narrative rather than poetry), or when a particular subject is being discussed (e.g., almost half of all NT occurrences of γλῶσσα occur in 1 Cor 12–14). Knowledge of such distributions plays a significant role in determining the semantic value of a term vis-à-vis the other terms that occupy the same semantic field. If we find, e.g., that word X is never or rarely used by Paul, then that word does not play an important role for him in the semantic field to which it belongs; thus his choice of word Y rather than X does not have the same significance as it does in the case of an author who uses both Y and X freely. In short, relative lexical frequency—when viewed generally, not in precise figures—should not be ignored when evaluating the function of the vocabulary.

6. Miscellaneous

(1) The translation of texts from extrabiblical literature is guided by the desire to bring out the lexical point being made in the discussion, and this purpose most often calls for a literal approach. Unintentionally, the resulting translation sometimes happens to correspond closely to what is found in published English editions, but the latter are cited only when they provide distinctive renderings. A similar approach has been followed with quotations from the LXX, though often the NETS is cited as well. Translations of the Hebrew OT and of the NT, unless otherwise noted, are taken from the NIV (for the Apocrypha, the NRSV serves this purpose). There are exceptions, however; in particular, when citing a word or short phrase, a more literal rendering is often used. For the sake of consistency, all references to biblical books and chapter/verse numbers are based on the English Bible (e.g., even when the LXX is under discussion, we refer to 1–2 Samuel and 1–2 Kings rather than to 1–4 Kingdoms/Reigns, and to Ezra and Nehemiah rather than to 2 Esdras). When necessary, alternate chapter/verse numbers are included in parentheses.

(2) References to extrabiblical Greek literature follow the system used by TLG (which in turn reproduces the numerations found in the standard editions); in the case of Herodotus’ Histories, we have also included the subdivision numbers used in the Loeb edition (Herodotus, transl. A. D. Godley [1920]). References to the documents found in the Judean Desert follow The Dead Sea Scrolls: Study Edition, ed. F. García Martínez and E. J. C. Tigchelaar [1997–98]); in the case of the Thanksgiving Hymns (1QHa), we have included, under the abbrevation Suk., the column numeration found in earlier editions and translations (based on The Dead Sea Scrolls of the Hebrew University, ed. E. L. Sukenik [1955]; note, however, that the line numeration differs somewhat among the various editions).

(3) The bibliographies have been thoroughly revised. In some cases, they have been drastically streamlined; in all cases, items published during the last three decades have been added. Readers will note a modest increase in the number of items that are linguistic in nature and that deal with classical usage. At the beginning of each bibliography, reference works are listed in this order: TDNT, EDNT (if the treatment is substantial enough to merit mention), Spicq, Trench, TDOT, NIDOTTE (occasionally, additional reference works are mentioned). Commentaries, even when referred to in the body of an article, are not listed in the bibliography (on the assumption that these constitute the most obvious resource). If a book or essay, though mentioned in the body of the article for one reason or another, does not address in a significant way the main concerns of the article, it is not included in the bibliography.

(4) On first mention of a Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek word that occurs in the Bible, the corresponding GK number is included (see the dictionary-indexes in W. Goodrick and John R. Kohlenberger III, Zondervan NIV Exhaustive Concordance [1999]). In the case of Hebrew homonyms, a distinguishing roman numeral is added (Goodrick and Kohlenberger use a superscript number); it should be noted, however, that these do not always correspond to the roman numerals used in other publications (e.g., HALOT).

Finally, I wish to express my deep appreciation to Stan Gundry for his initiative and patience in connection with this project, and to Verlyn Verbrugge and his editorial team for their invaluable assistance.

Moisés Silva

Abbreviations

1. General

2. Publications

Note: Christian, Jewish, and Greco-Roman texts are referred to by their standard abbreviations. See esp. The SBL Handbook of Style, 2nd ed. (2014), ch. 8; J. F. Oates et al., eds., Checklist of Greek, Latin, Demotic and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets, 5th ed. (2001).

List of Greek Words

The Greek words in the first column are in Greek alphabetical order, accompanied with their assigned Goodrick-Kohlenberger number (labeled G####), given in the second column. (To convert a Strong number to a Goodrick-Kohlenberger number, see the Strong to Goodrick-Kohlenberger Number Conversion Chart in the back of this dictionary.) If the Greek word is a main lexical entry, there is no entry in the third column (Greek Word Studied). That means that you can go directly to the Greek word in the first column, where the word, along with other related words, is studied. All other Greek words direct you to a different Greek word for your study. On occasion you will find the same Greek word listed twice in the first column, because it is discussed under two different organizing words. Inevitably this happens with Greek compound words, where each of the individual words is studied. See, for example, G17 (ἀγαθοποιΐα), studied under both ἀγαθός and ποιέω.