Dave Moser: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.
ASROCK x570 Creator, AMD R9 3950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, Asus Strix RTX 2080 ti, 2tb m.2 Seagate Firecuda SSD (x2) ...and other mechano-digital happiness.
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not."
Clifford B. Kvidahl: David Thomas: Puddin’: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
David Thomas: Puddin’: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.
Puddin’: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
Same here. Very pleased with the content and price of this bundle.
Clifford B. Kvidahl: 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!
MBPro'12 / i5 / 8GB // 3.0 Scholars (Purple) / L6 & L7 Platinum, M&E Platinum, Anglican Bronze, P&C Silver / L8 Platinum, Academic Pro
Dave Moser: Richard Villanueva: 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.
Richard Villanueva: 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?
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 👏🏼👏🏼!
https://apostolicacademics.com/
Mattillo: Can I ask where you got it for $99? I'm assuming a competitor?
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?).
Thanks David. I was unaware of that.
DAL:Maybe OT was the competitor, because Accordance and WORDsearch have never offered it for that low price. DAL
DAL
Folks we have a winner 🤓!