TDOT & TDNT

I realize these resources are quite dated, which is the reason I have never spent the $$ on them inasmuch as I already have standard works such as BDAG, HALOT, NIDNTTE, NIDOTTE, UBS, etc.

But, I just picked up the 15 volumed TDOT last night for a mere $99, and, I must say that I am really enjoying it so far. I’m currently taking Hebrew 1 so I thought it might come in handy. And, I do still see these works referenced in various grammars, commentary‘s, etc.

Your thoughts? Are these works still relevant for lexicography or are they considered obsolete?

I would ask the same thing regarding A.T. Robertson’s mammoth work “A Grammar of the Greek NT in the Light of Historical Research.” My Greek prof. says that he thinks it’s still relevant. Just wondering about the consensus of those more learned in original languages than myself (though I am working on it 😉).

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mab

Truth doesn't have a date expiration stamp. There may be some newer aspects of linguistics but theology isn't subject to fashion.trends despite some people's tendency to think there might be,

Dave Moser

I think the main criticism of TDOT/NT is not that they are out of date but that they tend to imbue too much theological freight into words.

Mathew Voth

It should be noted that while the TDNT is often criticized, and is not aging well, this is not the case with the TDOT. The latter is held in high esteem within biblical studies.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038241#Comment_1038241

I think the main criticism of TDOT/NT is not that they are out of date but that they tend to imbue too much theological freight into words.

When I read this, I didn't know whether to laugh or shake my head. I did both.

Richard Villanueva

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038241#Comment_1038241

but that they tend to imbue too much theological freight into words

Wouldnt this be expected of a dictionary called the "Theological Dictionary of Old/New Testament"? Not trying to be cute here, but I would imagine that is the point of this kind of resource, right?

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038256#Comment_1038256

but that they tend to imbue too much theological freight into words

Wouldnt this be expected of a dictionary called the "Theological Dictionary of Old/New Testament"? Not trying to be cute here, but I would imagine that is the point of this kind of resource, right?

[I]

Richard Villanueva

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038258#Comment_1038258

My mother always told me I was pretty smart. Maybe she is right, after all. [;)]

Puddin’

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038248#Comment_1038248

It should be noted that while the TDNT is often criticized, and is not aging well, this is not the case with the TDOT. The latter is held in high esteem within biblical studies.

Good point. Due to BDAG & Oxyrhincus I suspected this. Think I’ll pass on the TDNT inasmuch as I already have virtually every NT lexicon on the market, but really wanted to beef up my OT resources...and couldn’t pass up an almost 90% discount 😳!

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038260#Comment_1038260

It should be noted that while the TDNT is often criticized, and is not aging well, this is not the case with the TDOT. The latter is held in high esteem within biblical studies.

Good point. Due to BDAG & Oxyrhincus I suspected this. Think I’ll pass on the TDNT inasmuch as I already have virtually every NT lexicon on the market, but really wanted to beef up my OT resources...and couldn’t pass up an almost 90% discount 😳!

Puddin', you got so many cars, why buy a truck? Theological dictionaries exist, because simpleton BDAGs copy from previous editions, just enough to remain affordable.

Skipping TDNT might be valid due to issues earlier in its history, but it's constantly cited, and not particularly expensive; often on sale.

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038269#Comment_1038269

Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?

Paul Caneparo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038274#Comment_1038274

Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?

I don't think we're meant to point people to where, but you can assume a competitor. I picked up a 14 volume NT commentary set for $39.99 in their Beat the Clock sale. They're not as good as Logos, but prices like that are hard to turn down. Especially when I had 2 of the volumes in my wishlist at $45.98.

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038287#Comment_1038287

Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?

I don't think we're meant to point people to where, but you can assume a competitor. I picked up a 14 volume NT commentary set for $39.99 in their Beat the Clock sale. They're not as good as Logos, but prices like that are hard to turn down. Especially when I had 2 of the volumes in my wishlist at $45.98.

No worries Paul. I wish Logos could get sales like this but I'll patiently wait and hope

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038288#Comment_1038288

Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?

I don't think we're meant to point people to where, but you can assume a competitor. I picked up a 14 volume NT commentary set for $39.99 in their Beat the Clock sale. They're not as good as Logos, but prices like that are hard to turn down. Especially when I had 2 of the volumes in my wishlist at $45.98.

No worries Paul. I wish Logos could get sales like this but I'll patiently wait and hope

Maybe it was his dynamic price for the Academic Professional Package. Mine is just a little over $200, but some have bought it for $120

DAL

Dave Moser

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038256#Comment_1038256

Wouldnt this be expected of a dictionary called the "Theological Dictionary of Old/New Testament"? Not trying to be cute here, but I would imagine that is the point of this kind of resource, right?

The OP's original question was about the usefulness of these resources for lexicography.

And I replied to that narrow question: The common criticism is that these resources go beyond lexicography in that they don't simply "recognize" a word's definition or even its theological content, but incorporate too much of its surrounding theological context that properly belong to other words. I chose the word "imbue" with care.

If you have Carson's Exegetical Fallacies, check his "Common Fallacies in Semantics" section. Errors 7, 8, and especially 13 are what people are referring to when they criticize it.

I'd also like to note that I didn't give my own evaluation of this argument, just alerted him to that it's a common critique. Even if valid, the argument doesn't make the resources "bad," just not entirely aimed at lexical work.

These resources are indeed valuable, but many people believe they have deficiencies in lexicography - which was the original question.

Paul Caneparo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038290#Comment_1038290

Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?

I don't think we're meant to point people to where, but you can assume a competitor. I picked up a 14 volume NT commentary set for $39.99 in their Beat the Clock sale. They're not as good as Logos, but prices like that are hard to turn down. Especially when I had 2 of the volumes in my wishlist at $45.98.

No worries Paul. I wish Logos could get sales like this but I'll patiently wait and hope

Maybe it was his dynamic price for the Academic Professional Package. Mine is just a little over $200, but some have bought it for $120

DAL

It was a competitor's sale 2 days ago.

David Thomas

But, I just picked up the 15 volumed TDOT last night for a mere $99, and, I must say that I am really enjoying it so far.

While I can't find this price in Logos, Those who are interested in it should checkout the Logos 8 Academic Professional Bundle. I can get the whole bundle for just about 50% of this resource alone.

Steve Maling

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038307#Comment_1038307

So did I. And with dynamic pricing I got the rest of the ICC for a very small amount, not to mention a number of other treasures. The Academic Professional package can be a tremendously good deal!

Clifford B. Kvidahl

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038307#Comment_1038307

But, I just picked up the 15 volumed TDOT last night for a mere $99, and, I must say that I am really enjoying it so far.

While I can't find this price in Logos, Those who are interested in it should checkout the Logos 8 Academic Professional Bundle. I can get the whole bundle for just about 50% of this resource alone.

That's how I picked up TDOT as well. I got it, and the rest of the L8 Academic Professional Bundle for just over $100.

Cliff

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038307#Comment_1038307

Maybe OT was the competitor, because Accordance and WORDsearch have never offered it for that low price.

DAL

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038291#Comment_1038291

If you have Carson's Exegetical Fallacies, check his "Common Fallacies in Semantics" section. Errors 7, 8, and especially 13 are what people are referring to when they criticize it.

Jer. 1:11-12 NASB

Ah, Carson...he of the "fallacy fallacy", which is the fallacy of pinning the term "fallacy" on that which is anything but. While there are legitimate examples of all of the fallacies Carson lists to be found, some of the things that Carson tries to pin the label on are anything but. One ought to keep in mind that scholars have long accused the apostles AND Yeishuua` of "twisting Scripture" when they engaged in their own style of exegesis and interpretation. In light of the passage above, people who are of such a mind could also level a charge against YHWH of being "hermeneutically irresponsible", if they dared. One of the (for some folks) annoying characteristics of prophetic communication is that it frequently engages in the flouting of most--if not all--of these scholarly and hermeneutic concerns. One of the intents of prophetic communication is to communicate without being obvious about the intent. There are many reasons for this approach...some of them include "not throwing pearls before swine" and the imposition of prophetic judgment, whereby YHWH, having communicated His will plainly only to see it ignored, responds by speaking a curse against the intransigents that is effectively impossible for the guilty parties to properly comprehend. One of the ways YHWH conceals His ultimate intent is through the use of word games, both lexical and semantic, ergo the citation above. While I understand why some folks find this disconcerting, their uneasiness doesn't do anything to prevent YHWH from engaging in the behavior.

I also shake my head at blanket assertions that perceived "anachronism" is ipso facto evidence of interpretive error. Scholars, whose love affair with diachrony is well-documented, dismiss sychronic approaches to exegesis as the quaint bumblings of the provincial past. They fail to take into account that the ultimate author of Scripture has a little trick He likes to utilize which is, broadly speaking, the manipulation of time and space. YHWH is utterly impervious to issues of time. Charges of anachronism are often unwitting admissions of foolish ignorance. He plainly asserts His ability to know the end from the beginning, so it stands to reason He will introduce concepts at various points in the "narrative arrow of time" that won't be fully elucidated or prophetically explicated until centuries or millennia later. Saying that "human authors" had no comprehension of the serpent of Genesis being equated with the dragon of Revelation is naive in the extreme. While they my not have had such awareness, their Inspirer emphatically did.

It's considerations such as these, among dozens more, that explains why the needle of prophetic comprehension rarely blips from the flat line.

EDIT: Technically, there is some overlap of error 13 above with error 1, which Carson calls the Root Fallacy. Ignoring the fact that Carson's quote of James Barr's dismissive example comparing lehhem & mil:hhaamaah is demonstrably erroneous on multiple accounts, those who like to toss charges of fallaciousness could accuse YHWH of the root fallacy in Jer. 1:11-12. Good luck with that.

Richard Villanueva

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038357#Comment_1038357

That's how I picked up TDOT as well. I got it, and the rest of the L8 Academic Professional Bundle for just over $100.

Cliff

Me too! It was a killer deal!

Puddin’

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038291#Comment_1038291

Wouldnt this be expected of a dictionary called the "Theological Dictionary of Old/New Testament"? Not trying to be cute here, but I would imagine that is the point of this kind of resource, right?

The OP's original question was about the usefulness of these resources for lexicography.

And I replied to that narrow question: The common criticism is that these resources go beyond lexicography in that they don't simply "recognize" a word's definition or even its theological content, but incorporate too much of its surrounding theological context that properly belong to other words. I chose the word "imbue" with care.

If you have Carson's Exegetical Fallacies, check his "Common Fallacies in Semantics" section. Errors 7, 8, and especially 13 are what people are referring to when they criticize it.

I'd also like to note that I didn't give my own evaluation of this argument, just alerted him to that it's a common critique. Even if valid, the argument doesn't make the resources "bad," just not entirely aimed at lexical work.

These resources are indeed valuable, but many people believe they have deficiencies in lexicography - which was the original question.

Exactly 👏🏼👏🏼!

Puddin’

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038274#Comment_1038274

Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?

I think that specific sale is over now anyway (just checked). But, yea‘, it was one of Logos’s major competitors. They are typically cheaper, but, as someone else pointed out, nowhere near as academic as Logos (which is why I use both).

Can PM me for more details (assuming these forums have PM?).

Puddin’

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038307#Comment_1038307

But, I just picked up the 15 volumed TDOT last night for a mere $99, and, I must say that I am really enjoying it so far.

While I can't find this price in Logos, Those who are interested in it should checkout the Logos 8 Academic Professional Bundle. I can get the whole bundle for just about 50% of this resource alone.

Thanks David. I was unaware of that.

Puddin’

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1038372#Comment_1038372

Maybe OT was the competitor, because Accordance and WORDsearch have never offered it for that low price.
DAL

Folks we have a winner 🤓!