Page 2 of 2 (24 items) < Previous 1 2
This post has 23 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 11506
Forum MVP
NB.Mick | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 25 2012 1:17 AM

Christopher Michaud:

I like Liddell's A Greek-English Lexicon (unabridged).  Every bit as extensive as BDAG, but  focus's on Classical Greek.   


welcome to the Logos user forums!

I think, focussing on Classical Greek might become a bit of a problem. Words evolve and change their meaning over time - and we are talking several hundred years here. For example, Luther used a word for a female relative, I think it was daughter-in-law, Schnur. Even though his bible translation became the blueprint for German as a written language, no one knows this word anymore in this sense (you'll find its other meaning, cord, if you look it up someplace). Other words may continue to point at the same thing, but may carry a totally different overtone, e.g. change from a neutral to positive descriptive meaning to a pejorative.

The other thing is that there seems to be a certain difference between Greek that was used for writing theater plays, political speeches, history etc. and the Greek of common people used for shopping lists, employment contracts, personal letters. Again a focus on Classical Greek may lead one to understand less of the meaning of a certain word than more. The Logos product page of M-M explains and has examples for this.

That said, I wish I had the funds to buy BDAG and LSJ. Currently I stick with TDNT, M-M, Louw-Nida


Running Logos 9 latest (beta) version on Win 10

Posts 9947
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 25 2012 5:56 AM

Christopher Michaud:

I like Liddell's A Greek-English Lexicon (unabridged).  Every bit as extensive as BDAG, but  focus's on Classical Greek.   Some entries are more extensive than BDAG, and more complete..  I've gotten a better perspective on the meanings of some Greek words from studying it.  

I like it as well and occasionally use it (especially for Perseus items and sometimes in the LXX though I have Lust for that as well).  LSJ isn't, however, as much in depth with NT usages.  I recommend BOTH LSJ and BDAG.  If you have only one, BDAG should be that one.


יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 11433
DMB | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 25 2012 6:38 AM

Not arguing here but just explaining. My interest in LSJ 'first' is mainly due to my own belief (which could easily be wrong; we weren't there). But typically if a religious group is working off a religious writing from 1-2 centuries earlier, then the dictionary in theory should be consulted relative to the earlier period.

Very similar to Logos offering an older Webster dictionary due to translations from the 1600-1800s. Today's dictionaries might or might not hit the older usage.

Most of my more liberal commentaries knock Paul for his abuse of the LXX/MT but I suspect he had no choice; that was his audience's religious world and conceptual usage.

Of course there's the argument for common everyday language (koine) and so I next take a look at MM and possibly TDNT/TLNT for more discussion.

That's also why I really think Sophacles for the later post-apostolic period is needed. As you read in the late 200s to the late 400s, you just hope nothing's changed much (or ask someone like George).

"God will save his fallen angels and their broken wings He'll mend."

Posts 10813
Forum MVP
Jack Caviness | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Aug 25 2012 10:24 AM

Michael Childs:
I am very worried about myself because I find myself agreeing with George more and more.  Angel

That is frightening, for I also find myself agreeing with him. I just tell myself that George is simply becoming more intelligent Big Smile

Page 2 of 2 (24 items) < Previous 1 2 | RSS