Jump to content


Photo

Modern lexicons


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 WhiteWings

WhiteWings

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows, Android

Posted 04 December 2018 - 04:00 AM

I'm looking for a good Hebrew and Greek lexicon as a first addition to my Basic package.
Some lexicons seem to be very good and used in the scholary world. But the last revision sometimes is quite old

Big Kittel is high on my list but is published in 1964
Liddell & Scott's Greek-English Lexicon Complete 9th Edition, published in 1940.

Since those publishing dates, new manuscripts were discovered, leading to new translation insights.
So... I'm looking for high quality Greek/Hebrew lexicons that are up-to-date and unabridged.

Any advise?


PC: Homebuilt, Win 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700x, 64GB RAM 1.5 TB SSD, 25 TB HDD, 2x30" screen.
Phone: OnePlus 6T, Android 9, 8GB RAM, 128GB storage.

Notebook: Acer 10 2-in-1. Win 10 Home. Underspecced, but runs 10 hours on a charge which is great during flights.

Best of all: Accordance :-)


#2 John Fidel

John Fidel

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 321 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 06:10 AM

The academic standards are BDAG and HALOT. If you want a theological lexicon, then the Zondervan NIDTTE is more  recent and updated than "Big Kittel". I also recommend you consider Louw Nida.


  • miketisdell likes this

#3 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:05 AM

The academic standards are BDAG and HALOT. If you want a theological lexicon, then the Zondervan NIDTTE is more  recent and updated than "Big Kittel". I also recommend you consider Louw Nida.

I would push you to skip HALOT and go for the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. It covers all Hebrew outside of the biblical corpus as well. It is in the process of revision to add new inscriptional evidence (which means Accordance will not see the revised version for a while). It is probably the best Hebrew Lexicon out there currently.


Cheers,

 

Matt C


#4 WhiteWings

WhiteWings

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows, Android

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:27 AM

Thanks for the suggestions so far. Keep them coming :rolleyes: Much appreciated. 


PC: Homebuilt, Win 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700x, 64GB RAM 1.5 TB SSD, 25 TB HDD, 2x30" screen.
Phone: OnePlus 6T, Android 9, 8GB RAM, 128GB storage.

Notebook: Acer 10 2-in-1. Win 10 Home. Underspecced, but runs 10 hours on a charge which is great during flights.

Best of all: Accordance :-)


#5 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 11:58 AM

BDAG is the standard for Greek. It also covers inscriptions and Classical Greek. I don't know of many other Greek Lexicons that are comparable.


Cheers,

 

Matt C


#6 דָנִיאֶל

דָנִיאֶל

    Ruby

  • Super Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,101 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, Android

Posted 04 December 2018 - 12:03 PM

I am waiting for Cambridge coming out next year.

 

Thx

D


  • MattChristian likes this
Sola lingua bona est lingua mortua
ἡ μόνη ἀγαθὴ γλῶσσα γλῶσσα νεκρὰ ἐστιν
lišanu ēdēnitu damqitu lišanu mītu

"Du stammst vom Herrn Adam und der Herrin Eva ab", sagte Aslan. "Und das ist zugleich Ehre genug, um das Häupt des ärmsten Bettlers zu erheben, und genug, um die Schultern des größten Kaisers auf Erden zu beugen. Sei zufrieden." Aslan, Die Chroniken von Narnia, Prinz Kaspian von Narnia. CS Lewis. Übersetzt von Wolfgang Holbein und Christian Rendel.

Accordance Syntax Search For Wallace's Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics : https://github.com/4...WallaceInSyntax

Accordance Configurations :

Mac : 2009 27" iMac
12GB RAM

Windows : MSI GE72 7RE Apache Pro laptop
Intel Core Duo Intel i7 Kabylake

Android : Samsung Note III 5.0, Samsung Tab S3 7.0 and Lenovo TAB4 8" 7.1

#7 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,103 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Monet
  • Interests:heritage homes, antiques, gardens, fresh food, good coffee, live music, ויין אשר ישמח לבב אנוש (Ps 104,15)
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS, Android

Posted 04 December 2018 - 01:29 PM

The academic standards are BDAG and HALOT.

 

 

I would push you to skip HALOT and go for the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. It covers all Hebrew outside of the biblical corpus as well. It is in the process of revision to add new inscriptional evidence (which means Accordance will not see the revised version for a while). It is probably the best Hebrew Lexicon out there currently.

 

Hi,

 

In the spirit of a friendly rejoinder, and as I've said before, anyone considering buying DCH or its concise version should read Anderson’s scathing criticisms of it at https://www.biblical...3_50_clines.pdf. I’ve been checking DCH definitions over the past three years, and Anderson’s criticisms hold true for the entire set. DCH has its place, but given its methodological inconsistency, it has to be used with extreme caution. Practically this doesn’t matter for the most common words, but often does for the ones that occur once or a few times.

Another fairly common criticism of DCH is that it doesn't offer much new information, i.e., you can easily find word stats and simple grammatical information elsewhere.

Also, how would beginners evaluate "new words," i.e., those that don't occur in BDB, 1906? One practical way for non-specialists is to check HALOT to see if a gloss/definition has "gained the approval of the mainstream of scholarly opinion." I spoke a bit about this at https://www.accordan...n-dch/?hl=halot .

Finally, I've read HALOT, CDCH, BDB, Holladay's CHALOT, and Even-Shosan cover to cover over the years, and have developed my own glosses based on them and other research. Based on that, and reading articles in my field, it seems to me that HALOT is still the standard in English circles, in conjunction with KAHAL (Konzise und aktualisierte Ausgabe des Hebräischen und Aramäischen Lexikons zum Alten Testament) for those who read German.

DCH has its uses. I use it myself. But, I wouldn't recommend C/DCH as the first Hebrew lexicon for reading the HB. I know there will be a few on this forum who disagree with this assessment, and I know why. But I especially do not agree with the simple assessments that HALOT uses a classical etymological gloss approach, and DCH uses a modern linguistic one. Anderson's article helps get below the surface to show that simply isn't the case. Matt, I think that you especially would find that article interesting.

Regards,

Michel

 

Edited: the link to the article
 


Edited by Michel Gilbert, 04 December 2018 - 01:34 PM.

Michel G. Distefano, Ph.D.

 

Accordance Desktop 12.3 beta on Mac mini, Mojave, 10.14

Accordance iOS 2.7.2 on iPad mini
Accordance Android 1.2.1 on Huawei 6.0.1

  


#8 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 01:49 PM

Hi,

 

In the spirit of a friendly rejoinder, and as I've said before, anyone considering buying DCH or its concise version should read Anderson’s scathing criticisms of it at https://www.biblical...3_50_clines.pdf. I’ve been checking DCH definitions over the past three years, and Anderson’s criticisms hold true for the entire set. DCH has its place, but given its methodological inconsistency, it has to be used with extreme caution. Practically this doesn’t matter for the most common words, but often does for the ones that occur once or a few times.

Another fairly common criticism of DCH is that it doesn't offer much new information, i.e., you can easily find word stats and simple grammatical information elsewhere.

Also, how would beginners evaluate "new words," i.e., those that don't occur in BDB, 1906? One practical way for non-specialists is to check HALOT to see if a gloss/definition has "gained the approval of the mainstream of scholarly opinion." I spoke a bit about this at https://www.accordan...n-dch/?hl=halot .

Finally, I've read HALOT, CDCH, BDB, Holladay's CHALOT, and Even-Shosan cover to cover over the years, and have developed my own glosses based on them and other research. Based on that, and reading articles in my field, it seems to me that HALOT is still the standard in English circles, in conjunction with KAHAL (Konzise und aktualisierte Ausgabe des Hebräischen und Aramäischen Lexikons zum Alten Testament) for those who read German.

DCH has its uses. I use it myself. But, I wouldn't recommend C/DCH as the first Hebrew lexicon for reading the HB. I know there will be a few on this forum who disagree with this assessment, and I know why. But I especially do not agree with the simple assessments that HALOT uses a classical etymological gloss approach, and DCH uses a modern linguistic one. Anderson's article helps get below the surface to show that simply isn't the case. Matt, I think that you especially would find that article interesting.

Regards,

Michel

 

Edited: the link to the article
 

I actually find myself in the linguistic stream. Many studies have shown that even dead languages operate on set rules, the same as modern languages. That is not really a topic for debate here. I push for DCH as the best lexicon because like BDAG, it incorporates material found outside the HB. This helps to further define glosses. While a gloss may be operating one way semantically in the HB, it may have other uses that illuminate meanings in biblical texts from outside the HB corpus. I am a fan of Anderson (although I do not agree with everything he says). HALOT is a great resource, I usually go to it first for glosses, but in true studies of etymology and historical study, DCH is the way to go in my opinion. It really depends on what you need the tools for honestly. I come from a diachronic approach as opposed to a distributional one and any tool that helps me trace historical syntax/orthographic/semantic information is of primary interest to me.


  • Unix likes this

Cheers,

 

Matt C


#9 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 02:31 PM

Man, I've been down this road and Michel won. His experience persuaded me to pay more attention to HALOT and especially Holliday. What I found most persuasive was Michel's thorough checking of glosses across the whole (or most) of the Hebrew Bible. I've read a lot of Hebrew, but I think he has read a lot more and he's done so with attention to the to which lexicon is most helpful. 

 

All this to say, I hear you too Matt, but you might want to give Michel another listen. 


Edited by Brian W. Davidson, 04 December 2018 - 02:33 PM.


#10 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 02:38 PM

Then again you are both in the same place, really. You are both saying HALOT first. Anyway, I just wanted to share my experience of being persuaded by Michel about Hebrew lexica. That's all.  :D



#11 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,103 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Monet
  • Interests:heritage homes, antiques, gardens, fresh food, good coffee, live music, ויין אשר ישמח לבב אנוש (Ps 104,15)
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS, Android

Posted 04 December 2018 - 02:55 PM

Thanks Brian. In the end, in this post and on this Forum, it comes down to whether there are valid reasons to recommend C/DCH over C/HALOT, and Anderson (a linguist) showed that DCH does not follow a pure modern linguistic method, which is the reason often given to choose C/DCH (for reading the HB). In fact, it borrows extensively from the classical one that it criticizes and claims to correct. I could add hundreds of examples to Anderson's. Likewise, classical lexicographers studied clauses and sentences, and the larger literary and cultural/historical contexts, to come up with their glosses. The actual differences are much more nuanced, and the overlaps extensive.

Regards,

Michel
 

Edit: And yes, I've done the whole HB now. I may offer my glosses one day, in a decade or so, after I test them all against Robert's syntax. The whole point has been to read all the clauses fluently.

And, some of what I said is for others, in case they are interested too. I know that you know that Anderson is a linguist.


Edited by Michel Gilbert, 04 December 2018 - 03:07 PM.

Michel G. Distefano, Ph.D.

 

Accordance Desktop 12.3 beta on Mac mini, Mojave, 10.14

Accordance iOS 2.7.2 on iPad mini
Accordance Android 1.2.1 on Huawei 6.0.1

  


#12 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 04 December 2018 - 03:12 PM

Thanks Brian. In the end, in this post and on this Forum, it comes down to whether there are valid reasons to recommend C/DCH over C/HALOT, and Anderson (a linguist) showed that DCH does not follow a pure modern linguistic method, which is the reason often given to choose C/DCH (for reading the HB). In fact, it borrows extensively from the classical one that it criticizes and claims to correct. I could add hundreds of examples to Anderson's. Likewise, classical lexicographers studied clauses and sentences, and the larger literary and cultural/historical contexts, to come up with their glosses. The actual differences are much more nuanced, and the overlaps extensive.

Regards,

Michel
 

That certainly makes sense, yet the body of material that DCH and Dr Clines covers is more expansive than HALOT. Especially with the new revisions (Volume one: Aleph published Jun 2018 adds a TON of new inscriptions and material). In my field of study, I am concerned with texts outside the HB and how the language is shaped there. I am familiar with Anderson's methods and conclusions. If I am reading the HB for my own use, I will typically go to HALOT, yet if I am looking at historical development, I will look at DCH and a few other works that are not lexicons (Blau's Phonology and Morphology volume, Reymond's new volume on Orthography, and some other linguists works that are being published in article form). Again, it really depends on what you need to do. Also, would love to se Shoshan in Accordance. That would be amazing


  • Unix likes this

Cheers,

 

Matt C


#13 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 06 December 2018 - 11:13 PM

Also a thought on Big Kittel- You can get the print version for around $100.00 on some sites, but if you want ease of reference and to save some space on your bookshelf, it is a good resource, but again it focuses mainly on theological words. BDAG will cover all words


Cheers,

 

Matt C


#14 mgvh

mgvh

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 215 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland, USA
  • Interests:Archaeology, Photography, Biking
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 06 December 2018 - 11:42 PM

As for Greek... Yes, BDAG is still the primary one, but The Exegetical Dictionary of the NT (available in Accordance) is probably more helpful for my seminary students.

For something cheaper that is a reliable compromise, I have encouraged Accordance to acquire Danker's 2009 Concise Greek-English Lexicon since it is based on BDAG. I have my student purchase the Hebrew and Greek Discoverer package, and the best lexicons that come with it are the NT Word Study Dictionary and Louw-Nida. BDAG, EDNT, or Danker's Concise would all be steps up.


  • Timothy Jenney likes this

#15 WhiteWings

WhiteWings

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 23 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows, Android

Posted 07 December 2018 - 03:20 AM

Also a thought on Big Kittel- You can get the print version for around $100.00 on some sites, but if you want ease of reference and to save some space on your bookshelf, it is a good resource, but again it focuses mainly on theological words. BDAG will cover all words

My education is far from anything theological or language related. So I follow the discussion from the sideline. But still very grateful it's discussed.

Anyway I do have some views and that's why I quoted the above.

 

Theological works certainly have their value, but I don't fully trust them because of my fear doctrine is injected. I want facts and form my own doctrine.

I should know better than mentioning this because it likely makes this thread go way off-topic....

G928 βασανίζω basanizo. Look that up in one of the many lexicons and dictionaries. It always gives a meaning of torment/torture (as a primary meaning). And indeed that's the a correct meaning. But then I found this entry in TDNT

 

 

1. The βάσανος originally belongs to the calling of the inspector of coins. It is linked with the Heb. root בחן (“to test”) and the Egyptian bḫn; (“basalt”). According to K. Sethe.1 bhn is the word which underlies the Heb. בחן2 and the Gk. βάσανος. βάσανος is generally accepted to be a loan word. βασανίτης is most closely related to it. Βασανίτου λίθου ὄρος is the mountain of the bḫn stone. R. Herzog thinks that he may deduce from the etymological development that the ars spectandi, the testing of gold and silver as media of exchange by the proving stone, was first developed by the Babylonians, then came to the Aramaeans and Hebrews by way of Lydia (Λυδίαλίθος [Bacchyl. Fr., 14, 1, Blass]; βάσανος, Bacchyl., 8, 58), and from them to the Gks. In non-biblical Gk. βάσανος is a commercial expression, or is used in relation to government. It then acquires the meaning of the checking of calculations, which develops naturally out of the basic sense of βάσανος, βασανίζειν (P. Oxy., 58, 25 [288 AD]). In the spiritual sphere it has the figur., sense, which is closely related to the original concrete meaning, of a means of testing (Anth. Pal., VII, 54: ἀνδρῶν κρινομένων ἐν βασάνῳ σοφίης).
 

 

The word then undergoes a change in meaning. The original sense fades into the background. βάσανος now comes to denote “torture” or “the rack,” espec. used with slaves (P. Lille, I, 29, 22; Ditt. Syll.3, 356, 12). βάσανος occurs in the sense of “torment” in Theocr. Idyll., 13, p. 13, 5, Meineke; Thom. Mag., p. 94, 4, Ritschl; Demetr. Eloc., 201, 4. An inscription from Cyprus (Salamis), BCH, 51 (1927), 148, 18, contains the malediction: ἐν βασάνοις ἀπόλοιτο. Vet. Val., IV, 13, p. 182, 19, Kroll has a reference to torments of soul (ψυχικὰς βασάνους).5

 

So as an amateur I'm wondering why does any theological book even mention the meaning of that word after 288AD. Scripture was finished long before that, and those who wrote it used words with a meaning of their time, and not centuries later.

I know there is some debate when the last letter of the Bible was penned down, but lets say it was 100AD. Then in my opinion a theological lexicon should not list a single definition after 100AD. That's for Greek. For Hebrew even earlier.

 

That brings me to my ideal dictionary/lexicon.

I have an Oxford English dictionary that shows quotes and dates of a word being used in the past.

I would love such type of dictionary for the Bible. When was the word first used? How and when did the word change its meaning over time?

I can for example imagine that a certain word for Moses had 5 meanings, for Jesus that word had 7 meanings but only 3 were the same as those of Moses. The word may even have changed its primary meaning. For me that's important to know.

 

Finances are always the limitting factor. If they weren't I would already have gotten every lexicon mentioned in this thread. In fact I would just have bought everything found in the Accordance store. But that's not what my bankaccount looks like :-)

 

End of rambling...


Edited by WhiteWings, 07 December 2018 - 03:21 AM.

  • Fabian likes this

PC: Homebuilt, Win 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700x, 64GB RAM 1.5 TB SSD, 25 TB HDD, 2x30" screen.
Phone: OnePlus 6T, Android 9, 8GB RAM, 128GB storage.

Notebook: Acer 10 2-in-1. Win 10 Home. Underspecced, but runs 10 hours on a charge which is great during flights.

Best of all: Accordance :-)


#16 Unix

Unix

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Twitter:mcyklist
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:EU. Inter/multidisciplinary humanities such as History of Ideas; singing; both Reformed and Catholic simultaneously
  • Interests:Accordance 12.3.0 is GREAT - I'm incredibly happy - the graphical constructs, view of multiple resources and footnotes, etc. are fantastic!! The software has been leading for three Years now, and the pricing model and availability of resources has been cutting edge since this Summer 2018. /Nov. 15. 2018 Previously purchased books also have got a lot of included free updates this Autumn. Monographs, Hebrew, Epigraphic Hebrew Inscriptions, books with a bit of occurrences of Latin words, Christian "Gnosticism", Polish National Faith (Rodnovery), (Environmental and a bit of Ethnological) History as well as that I've recently renewed interest in Architectural History, more modern Cultural History and Early Christian art /Aug. 2. 2017 edited Oct. 24. 2018 + veganism and organically/locally produced food, skincare and fragrant oil products just as treats and needed in fine culture participation/creation; particular interest in books copyrighted 1952-2010; christianforums.com; CPU preference and recommendation: Only ALL AMD CPU:s except E2; Scrivener as both Win and Mac versions early June 2015, HDDRegenerator.net on July 17. 2015. /Edited June 5. 2018 Now I've installed 12 on the desktop on Dec. 31. 2017. Addition Oct. 24. 2018: Providing support for my friendship networks and for (the relatives of) my best friends in Poland, France and Helsinki, and starting up a group for commentaries discussion (I know they are a biased resource type so I want to with my input and moderation steer the discussion to minimise the bias effect for the members.)
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 07 December 2018 - 05:12 PM

WhiteWings,

I'll comment on all of this. It is true a large part of users would spend more if they had much more, on Accordance. Yet, as I'm going to make a point different to what I begin this sentence with, most people in general don't have the fortitude to say no to beggars. For the vast majority of people regardless, with increasing wealth more people will be splitting their income and/or savings and/or interest income with them, except perhaps after some fairly mature age in life (late middle-age as well as at the point when having aged so much that almost no-one You knew or were related to anymore is alive anymore). In a way what You are saying about buying the whole catalogue is true. If I would have discovered Accordance a decade earlier I would probably have bought All-In-All on a payment plan, because I would have thought that as I would have at the point of it being offered been firmly choosing it as only platform ... - That is IF it would have been like that - … I would have wanted to do everything with it. As it were - without even having a computer altogether and library computers having extremely limited time to use them and not always even having a debit card, I stood helpless to find out about Accordance's existence until it was too late. Still I COULD have pulled the emergency break, and even at one point I was offered to do a full swap of platforms (but I had at the point a significant investment in $ terms with the competitor, not in terms of how good my library was so it would have been purely to support that pastor basically gifting him value, he hade made a fast and hard rule for the trade that we swop $ for $ value OR entire accounts, he was switching away from Accordance) if I would have.
I don't mean to talk about "if I would have".
At the point I'm at, I'm able to recommend every book, not every platform, in fact I almost never recommend a platform other than Accordance, that I have ever bought - each, as I've bought that selectively. It cost me and I can still not do everything under Accordance, not because of availability issues but because how things went down for me historically. When I contemplated this a few Years ago I realized I want to go the History of Ideas route. For that, sheer bulk in library, under Bible Study Softwares, doesn't remedy fingertip availability because most book and most publishers have never made it or even haven't wanted to make it, under any Bible Study Software licensing. So even with buying a whole catalogue, a library would not be balanced because there are several decades for which the best availability consists of printed matter.
The process of choosing, and the activity level/presence of recommending books everywhere a thread rises (usually outside of these forums really), weighs down by the amount of effort it takes, the timeslot I have for actually myself using software. Whether I would use the software more if I would have say one thousand more books under my Accordance account, boils down familiarity with books, not with the UI, the knowledge of the latter is at a certain point the prerequisite, but to even open a book - having it is not all it takes - nor is the sophistication - what I need to be is my own librarian really. And that is what I'm coming at: With the processes I've gone through I'm ready at the next available timeslot this ongoing Month, to write many dozens of solid book reviews in a matter of short amount of time. From there it is forward. That is the point from whereafter the dividends are opportune, the growing self-esteem provided by my output at that point will set me on track.
So to answer You: One could think one would buy thousands more books if just having that kind of finances. Truer is it doesn't go like that. But with all that said, I allow linguistics under Accordance cost upwards $7,200 in itself - which I will pay, and which is more dependant on if everything it takes will be released (e-texts from publishers and if it is worthwhile tagging- and keying -wise), on top of the rather small amount of resources I already have compared to active users. And that is not a of money. I will squeeze up a part during 2019 - the Year I have to pay A LOT to the state (upwards $4,500).

 

In order to go on with commenting, and this is easier: See my Facebook, and You don't need to scroll down a lot. There it says things. βασανίζω on Earth? Well no, I don't think everyone, I do believe in (not full) measures of justice. I still believe in Purgatory in the afterlife. See a particular post there on my wall, it will be obvious what I mean and it is all relevant for answering this see the word "r..." and how much I say it costs, as a requirement by authorities? Not for me, may the first be last and last first. Unselfishness FIRST, then if I succeed with the campaign I MIGHT thank myself by considering I deserve myself to get engaged - in this life, with a human, on a sharing passions and (the) future of a possibility of birthing an actual heir. I dare not remind my friends, I still value friendship to the degree I don't want to rid myself of hard-earned friends, so I think most of them have missed the post and/or would not afford to give €10 each.
Lk 12:58b CSB17: Then he won't drag you before the judge, the judge hand you over to the bailiff, and the bailiff throw you into prison.
I'm talking about a country that has been on the news that there are sanctions against the country for now. Whatever is given through me is humanitarian direct aid since it actually reaches despite of the sanctions.

 

 

And I think You are right. But life is both temporal, fleeting and eternal at the same time, which aware intellectuals this time in history must be aware of. There will be punishment, at least regret - at some point regret of negligence during life will strike. In the unawareness of what follows in our trails, what the destiny of our belongings consists of, how matters lead to produce or not and deals or regrets or costs for the environment, and the those who passed through our lives memorize us, it will all be like it was for Yehsuah:
Lk 22:44 Being in anguish, he prayed more fervently, and his sweat became like drops of blood falling on the ground
14:23f CSB17: Then the master told the servant, 'Go out into the highways and hedges and make them come in, so that my house may be filled. For I tell you, not one of those people who were invited will enjoy my banquet.
vs 28: "For which of you, wanting to build a tower, doesn't first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it?
33b: every one of you who des not renounce all his possessions cannot be my disciple.
-->
It doesn't say destroy. Sometimes only we can curate ourselves. And we must leave a legacy, it is preferred we leave an inheritance, if not we should care for the future generations in a general manner.
16:15c For what is highly admired by people is revolting in God's sight
vs 16: "urgently" Or everyone is forcing his way into it:

My education is far from anything theological or language related. So I follow the discussion from the sideline. But still very grateful it's discussed.

Anyway I do have some views and that's why I quoted the above.

 

Theological works certainly have their value, but I don't fully trust them because of my fear doctrine is injected. I want facts and form my own doctrine.

I should know better than mentioning this because it likely makes this thread go way off-topic....

G928 βασανίζω basanizo. Look that up in one of the many lexicons and dictionaries. It always gives a meaning of torment/torture (as a primary meaning). And indeed that's the a correct meaning. But then I found this entry in TDNT

 

 

So as an amateur I'm wondering why does any theological book even mention the meaning of that word after 288AD. Scripture was finished long before that, and those who wrote it used words with a meaning of their time, and not centuries later.

I know there is some debate when the last letter of the Bible was penned down, but lets say it was 100AD. Then in my opinion a theological lexicon should not list a single definition after 100AD. That's for Greek. For Hebrew even earlier.

 

That brings me to my ideal dictionary/lexicon.

I have an Oxford English dictionary that shows quotes and dates of a word being used in the past.

I would love such type of dictionary for the Bible. When was the word first used? How and when did the word change its meaning over time?

I can for example imagine that a certain word for Moses had 5 meanings, for Jesus that word had 7 meanings but only 3 were the same as those of Moses. The word may even have changed its primary meaning. For me that's important to know.

 

Finances are always the limitting factor. If they weren't I would already have gotten every lexicon mentioned in this thread. In fact I would just have bought everything found in the Accordance store. But that's not what my bankaccount looks like :-)

 

End of rambling…


Please SEE THIS recent LINK about Bible versions: https://www.christia...curate.7926578/ ... I use Confraternity Version a lot (both OT and NT). Exceptions/changes: Beck 1976 for GJn 8:32, 2004 GNT 3rd Ed. UK-English for Dt, NIV11-GKE for Isa also as a print journaling Bible; and I've added NIV78UK to regular use as well as NASB71 and 72 - these largely instead o the NIV84, RSV and NASB77. Additional versions I now both have and use: 1958 Westminster Version, 1985 NJB (two copies of which I like the older typesetting), 1970 NEB (in a four version parallel Bible), 1989 REB (beater HCs and white leather). (I recommend also a FB group for The Real Douay-Rheims 1610/1582 (purchasable from lulu.com))
NPP and English translations and commentaries as well as as a bit about learning the original languages: https://www.christia...posts/72219172/
Commentaries I both have and recommend as I don't regret my purchases - for the most part unspecified regarding which platform: https://community.lo...795.aspx#830795
I think the best Accordance base is to buy HALOT (and BDAG) used, and then upgrade to Hebrew Pro. I have never bought a Collection with actual content but am holding on to the working configuration I have so far and am going to buy version 13 Hebrew Pro. /decided on Apr. 6. 2018 I'm not going with Hebrew Expert for the forthcoming several major releases of Collections because I prefer som more recent different works in print - that are equivalent and a newer Edition for one particular work in print. Targum Onkelos would have been nice to have though in translation, I have a part in print bonded leather hard cover, on a sale on here right now until the 20.: https://www.accordan...ils/?pid=TARG-E Expert is fair value on a sale and not all that much clutter, nor is it low quality - but as I would perhaps not upgrade this ongoing Year anyway I'm still open to taking any route - going no upgrade add-ons only or Pro or Expert. 
/Nov. 15.-16. 2018:

acchebrewpro.without.versionnumber.jpg
I'm growing only my Accordance and print libraries (EDIT March 28. 2018: I now really have quit altogether placing new orders elsewhere) and printed matter nowadays only through the sites biblio and alibris. In fact I occasionally duplicate things, depending on price. I don't buy Collections/base-packages at all, to me an OK print library is a Collection/base-package and is bragging-rights, a mid-size Collection would not be!! I have the Urantia Book now, rebound in leather and would read it together with someone. Books copyrighted in the most recent Years (2011 and later) have to be truly exceptional for me to buy them - this is a strategy I'm going to stick to - I do buy newer books but they are among the expensive purchases. I very rarely have to add any lexicons or Bible Dictionaries, I access them wherever, under Accordance I have bought HALOT and BDAG used and am subscribing to the DCH in print revised Edition. Otherwise I prefer BAGD actually which I have under 6.9 8. The best One-Volume Bible commentary is Oxford Bible Commentary.
NAB70 OT and L6 + V8 Starter functionality including Chineze (which I don't speak/read) under spare account that still sits unused.
The Oxford Bible Commentary under other one pretty large current account that is the one I actually use. /Oct. 16. 2017 Edited Jan. 14. 2018. 

yesterday was 2 years since I returned from an archaeological trip to Turkey. /Apr 16. 2016 A bit of interest in Akkadian or Babylonian. /Apr. 2016
Disguising a portal to the past, the one fitting in compartments I have is an AMD A9 2017 dual core (so as not to waste Earth's resources) CPU model equipped with typical TDP 15 Watt which I throttle to 5-10% (or 25 if on current) of the CPU capacity (see also below where there is a benchmark comparison) with 12 GB DDR4 
1866 MHz RAM - it is 15.6" with physically Spanish keys (so with the ñ) but set to Swedish keyboard layout in Windows (English OS interface) - on it I use Accordance 11 and Verbum 8.1 (7.19 not competitive with Accordance, 8 not recommended) which regardless if upgraded is a mature software but evermore challenging to maintain, very cumbersome to build as a platform and will forever remain taxing on the system and just like a reader instead of focused on working closely with the resources. Two batteries, one 2200 mAh that came with it and one 4400 mAh a little larger.
(since it's W7 Professional and huge battery that actually can be gripped while carrying it open + a second "slice" battery) - on which I have had Accordance 10 now 11.2.5 [on the heavy laptop I had for a longish time until very recently] since Nov. 8. 2018 and I'm really pleased with the update's default analysis settings, grammatical construct settings, more scenarios in which to set English Bible version, clearness on how to open search results and where they are located in databases such as journals, [it had] 1TB SSD of which only a small fraction is filled. | Until 1½ Years ago I had: 8GB W10 AMD FX-7600P (since it's AMD:s best laptop CPU - I LOVE and recommend only AMD). So like I mentioned above now I have a new 12 GB laptop with a Q2 2017 AMD CPU equipped with single thread rating 1400 http://cykeltaxi.se/...re.i3-3110M.pdf
 My desktop has the excellent value for money G2030 CPU Ivy Bridge - it's the one on which I have Accordance 12 Starter installed, suitable amount of RAM. /March 28. 2018

(For satelite commuting a very old laptop just for emailing, dating sites, browsing for gear and tools for my Sole trader firm but not for Bible Study softwares, with graphics driver last version from 2009, Core 2 Extreme CPU, 4GB RAM (maxed), SSD 128 GB, three very old batteries.)
 
Relevant and representative Facebook: https://www.facebook...100009160762403 (see also my more seldom updated Twitter). /signature abbreviated June 16. 2018, amended Sept. 2. 2018, slightly more details Sept. 18., updated Dec. 8.


#17 Michael Hunt

Michael Hunt

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts
  • Twitter:oddsocks
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 10 December 2018 - 05:17 PM

You make a good observation there White Wings about later usage of a word potentially influencing a wrong understanding of earlier usage (i.e. by reading back into the older usage a more modern understanding). Our modern usage of the word dynamite is read back by some into the Greek word dynamis  (see below). 

 

"To try to build up an entire theology based on a single word and its use is a doubtful enterprise; to preach ‘reverse etymology’, where the meaning of a word is affirmed to be something like later developments of that word or its cognates (such as the assertion that dynamis, ‘power’, properly calls to mind ‘dynamite’—which had not been invented when the NT writers penned their books) is anachronistic at best, ridiculous at worst."

 

 

Carson, D. A. Approaching the Bible. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Edited by D. A Carson, R. T France, J. A. Motyer, and Gordon J. Wenham. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.2. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

 

However, that being said certain individual words clearly have an intended theological meaning. For example, the NT uses the following words for their theological meaning such as salvation, grace, sanctification, and holiness. And when words that seem not to be theological (i.e. horn) are linked with other words like salvation such as "horn of salvation" Luke 1:69 they to become theological in meaning.

 

While a lexicon can be designed as simple as giving a gloss or basic definition of word's meaning, sometimes in a particular field of inquiry much more is required. In a theological inquiry, a theological lexicon is required to look a) at the word's usage around the time of writing, B) it's usage by the author (which may be different or a reinterpretation of its usage) and c) how that word has been used and potential been viewed by subsequent persons.

 

Systematic theology generally borrows from both the study of a theological topic as unpacked by scripture (generally referred to as Biblical Theology) and how it has been understood and explained by those since (what some may refer to as Historical Theology). In the study of koine greek and theology, the early church fathers add a further dimension of inquiry due to their close proximity to the original NT texts in time, their general use and understanding of the language, and the fact that they were the first to try and systematise the teaching of the NT into creedal or doctrinal statements.

 

Textual interpretation flows not only out of an understanding of the meanings of words but also their place in phrases, sentences, paragraphs and even the whole of the documents that they occur in. A good theological lexicon will provide facts and interpretation but should make clear the difference. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. I think NIDNTTE and NIDOTTE would be the best additions for you to get based on what you have said so far.


Edited by Michael Hunt, 10 December 2018 - 05:17 PM.

  • Unix, Solly and WhiteWings like this
Formerly known as oddsocks

#18 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 10 December 2018 - 06:45 PM

You make a good observation there White Wings about later usage of a word potentially influencing a wrong understanding of earlier usage (i.e. by reading back into the older usage a more modern understanding). Our modern usage of the word dynamite is read back by some into the Greek word dynamis  (see below). 

 

"To try to build up an entire theology based on a single word and its use is a doubtful enterprise; to preach ‘reverse etymology’, where the meaning of a word is affirmed to be something like later developments of that word or its cognates (such as the assertion that dynamis, ‘power’, properly calls to mind ‘dynamite’—which had not been invented when the NT writers penned their books) is anachronistic at best, ridiculous at worst."

 

 

Carson, D. A. Approaching the Bible. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. Edited by D. A Carson, R. T France, J. A. Motyer, and Gordon J. Wenham. Accordance electronic edition, version 2.2. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1994.

 

However, that being said certain individual words clearly have an intended theological meaning. For example, the NT uses the following words for their theological meaning such as salvation, grace, sanctification, and holiness. And when words that seem not to be theological (i.e. horn) are linked with other words like salvation such as "horn of salvation" Luke 1:69 they to become theological in meaning.

 

While a lexicon can be designed as simple as giving a gloss or basic definition of word's meaning, sometimes in a particular field of inquiry much more is required. In a theological inquiry, a theological lexicon is required to look a) at the word's usage around the time of writing, B) it's usage by the author (which may be different or a reinterpretation of its usage) and c) how that word has been used and potential been viewed by subsequent persons.

 

Systematic theology generally borrows from both the study of a theological topic as unpacked by scripture (generally referred to as Biblical Theology) and how it has been understood and explained by those since (what some may refer to as Historical Theology). In the study of koine greek and theology, the early church fathers add a further dimension of inquiry due to their close proximity to the original NT texts in time, their general use and understanding of the language, and the fact that they were the first to try and systematise the teaching of the NT into creedal or doctrinal statements.

 

Textual interpretation flows not only out of an understanding of the meanings of words but also their place in phrases, sentences, paragraphs and even the whole of the documents that they occur in. A good theological lexicon will provide facts and interpretation but should make clear the difference. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. I think NIDNTTE and NIDOTTE would be the best additions for you to get based on what you have said so far.

I would actually argue BDAG would be the best. It is focused on lexeme's not theological agenda. It also takes care to show its use in Greek sources outside of the NT. I would also argue that most if not all of the early Gospels were first composed in Syriac or Aramaic (TYA will enjoy this) and that much of the western Church was influenced by the writings of the Eastern Church but that is a different conversation. I bring it up here because instead of thinking fully in terms of Greek language, we have to remember the dialectical variations that the underlying Greek text is Semitic in nature. Much of the vocabulary is based on what could be translations of Semitic sources. I feel BDAG does an OK job looking at this but for a deeper study, learn Syriac and read the Peshitta. Just MHO


Cheers,

 

Matt C


#19 Unix

Unix

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Twitter:mcyklist
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:EU. Inter/multidisciplinary humanities such as History of Ideas; singing; both Reformed and Catholic simultaneously
  • Interests:Accordance 12.3.0 is GREAT - I'm incredibly happy - the graphical constructs, view of multiple resources and footnotes, etc. are fantastic!! The software has been leading for three Years now, and the pricing model and availability of resources has been cutting edge since this Summer 2018. /Nov. 15. 2018 Previously purchased books also have got a lot of included free updates this Autumn. Monographs, Hebrew, Epigraphic Hebrew Inscriptions, books with a bit of occurrences of Latin words, Christian "Gnosticism", Polish National Faith (Rodnovery), (Environmental and a bit of Ethnological) History as well as that I've recently renewed interest in Architectural History, more modern Cultural History and Early Christian art /Aug. 2. 2017 edited Oct. 24. 2018 + veganism and organically/locally produced food, skincare and fragrant oil products just as treats and needed in fine culture participation/creation; particular interest in books copyrighted 1952-2010; christianforums.com; CPU preference and recommendation: Only ALL AMD CPU:s except E2; Scrivener as both Win and Mac versions early June 2015, HDDRegenerator.net on July 17. 2015. /Edited June 5. 2018 Now I've installed 12 on the desktop on Dec. 31. 2017. Addition Oct. 24. 2018: Providing support for my friendship networks and for (the relatives of) my best friends in Poland, France and Helsinki, and starting up a group for commentaries discussion (I know they are a biased resource type so I want to with my input and moderation steer the discussion to minimise the bias effect for the members.)
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 10 December 2018 - 10:01 PM

I must commend You all right now for that You are really focused! I compare You in my mind with those who (which is common to be led astray to start out with when looking at what some people arise as questions) only look at textual variants (in the NT where they notice) between Byzantic and Alexandrian "families of texts" - or only a very little more sophisticatedly. They seem to forget that what they touch by that is only one language in only one dialect (because I would think the majority of the variants are way too short to data-analyse or manually track to very specific dialects and underlying language of lost manuscripts or ancient oral readings of Scripture). Matt, You are are really at it tracking back in time!

 

How do You like Your lexicons? I've got for example an Thomas Aquinas special dictionary just for reading him.  :)

There's a party here? You are having a party, always. I came here to work.  ;) 

Go vote also at (liking a post/comment is enough too, according to Helen, in all clear Requests): https://www.accordan...ll/#entry122927 https://www.accordan...brill/?p=122888

Not wanting to detract from this and really appreciate all questions raised, am mainly just following this discussion - I'm not going to comment back on all comments back whether directed to me or You others, but...:

… Matt if I may ask a question which is personal to me? Do You think I should have BOTH BDAG and BAGD myself specifically for use in tandem? Having BAGD both under Bible Study Software and in print (mylar protective cover on top of the dust-jacket), but having a spare license for BDAG.
Under Accordance I already have BDAG though (and NIDNTTE which I bought for the introductory price when it was newly produced - and Accordance was first!!).

Appreciate! Perhaps a small question but rarely answered since (for) must users (think) it is an availability discussion and even budget matter when the topic is brought up about needing both or not. The thing is I like BAGD A LOT because it's dope to manage with it under the other Bible Study Software platform and receive compliments from other users about what all things I have and repeatedly hear sales persons offer me the BDAG (not going to buy it off the Storefront).
The spare BDAG license can otherwise be put under the spare account which I have reserved for when I either find a co-author or a girlfriend because the person needs to then get the spare unused account as a gift. It's unused, paid in full only by me, just curated, (part second-hand with one base-package third up from very lowest):

I would actually argue BDAG would be the best. It is focused on lexeme's not theological agenda. It also takes care to show its use in Greek sources outside of the NT. I would also argue that most if not all of the early Gospels were first composed in Syriac or Aramaic (TYA will enjoy this) and that much of the western Church was influenced by the writings of the Eastern Church but that is a different conversation. I bring it up here because instead of thinking fully in terms of Greek language, we have to remember the dialectical variations that the underlying Greek text is Semitic in nature. Much of the vocabulary is based on what could be translations of Semitic sources. I feel BDAG does an OK job looking at this but for a deeper study, learn Syriac and read the Peshitta. Just MHO

 



#20 MattChristian

MattChristian

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 174 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC
  • Interests:Assyriology, Dead Sea Scrolls, Semitic Linguistics, Language Contact, Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Akkadian,. Ugaritic, Sumerian, Hittite,Jesus, Coffee
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 10 December 2018 - 10:35 PM

I must commend You all right now for that You are really focused! I compare You in my mind with those who (which is common to be led astray to start out with when looking at what some people arise as questions) only look at textual variants (in the NT where they notice) between Byzantic and Alexandrian "families of texts" - or only a very little more sophisticatedly. They seem to forget that what they touch by that is only one language in only one dialect (because I would think the majority of the variants are way too short to data-analyse or manually track to very specific dialects and underlying language of lost manuscripts or ancient oral readings of Scripture). Matt, You are are really at it tracking back in time!

 

How do You like Your lexicons? I've got for example an Thomas Aquinas special dictionary just for reading him.  :)

There's a party here? You are having a party, always. I came here to work.  ;) 

Go vote also at (liking a post/comment is enough too, according to Helen, in all clear Requests): https://www.accordan...ll/#entry122927 https://www.accordan...brill/?p=122888

Not wanting to detract from this and really appreciate all questions raised, am mainly just following this discussion - I'm not going to comment back on all comments back whether directed to me or You others, but...:

… Matt if I may ask a question which is personal to me? Do You think I should have BOTH BDAG and BAGD myself specifically for use in tandem? Having BAGD both under Bible Study Software and in print (mylar protective cover on top of the dust-jacket), but having a spare license for BDAG.
Under Accordance I already have BDAG though (and NIDNTTE which I bought for the introductory price when it was newly produced - and Accordance was first!!).

Appreciate! Perhaps a small question but rarely answered since (for) must users (think) it is an availability discussion and even budget matter when the topic is brought up about needing both or not. The thing is I like BAGD A LOT because it's dope to manage with it under the other Bible Study Software platform and receive compliments from other users about what all things I have and repeatedly hear sales persons offer me the BDAG (not going to buy it off the Storefront).
The spare BDAG license can otherwise be put under the spare account which I have reserved for when I either find a co-author or a girlfriend because the person needs to then get the spare unused account as a gift. It's unused, paid in full only by me, just curated, (part second-hand with one base-package third up from very lowest):

I would say both are good for various reasons. A paired down version for quick reference and a larger version for fuller study. If you are doing translation, then quick glosses are needed. If you are doing lexical/semantic work, you need more material to work from. Until more lexicons are published or larger semantic categories are explored, the more sources you pull from the better!


  • Unix likes this

Cheers,

 

Matt C





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users