I have Harper's. A bit more adv. dict.? (presupp. a bit of Gk)

Anyone who has NIDNTT who could say how much it talks about the book of Sirach?:

Unix living in celibacy said:

The NT and Sirach are the most important. Surprisingly NIDNTT mentions the latter: Ecclesiasticus (Sirach)

 

Are there any other options for a dictionary that includes something about the book of Sirach? New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible must as the commentary does, but I'm not that convinced about whether it would be good.

 

It seems too evangelical, mainstream and expensive I'm afraid:

Kelvin Niblett said:

The Essential IVP reference collection v3 is your best option.

The NIDB has a couple of interesting Editors: the main Editor who was president for the Society of Biblical Literature for one year, and Pheme Perkins. But I don't like several of the other Editors who are Presbyterian. I took a quick look at few sample pages from NIDB at Abingdon Press's homepage. The articles had some division in the different parts of the Bible, such as OT, Gospels and Acts, Pauline Epistles, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better with a completely separate resource for the NT, such as the NIDNTT? One thing about the NIDB that I was  a bit disappointed with was that words from the Biblical languages are not properly transliterated, as can be seen from: http://www.uni-salzburg.at/pls/portal/docs/1/169994.PDF
Quote: "Sakenfeld, Katharine Doob, ed. The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible (NIDB) (5 vol 2009), the latest mainstream scholarship" Source: http://www.conservapedia.com/Bible
Searching "mainstream scholarship" NIDB in Google, yields 12 different search results.
Searching "mainstream scholarship" NIDNTT yields 6 different search results, of which one is: "70
Sanders, Historical Figure, 236-237. The Jesus Seminar (Robert W. Funk & Roy W. Hoover, eds.,
The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus [New York: Polebridge, 1993])
concluded that the vast majority of the aforementioned texts (both the eschatological and noneschatological ones), in which Jesus speaks of himself, are likely to be inauthentic. However, I have already noted that the Seminar adopts an extreme position as regards the authenticity of the Gospels and is in no way representative of mainstream scholarship; see p. 29-30 n. 39." But the search result does talk about the word "mainstream"alone several times.
Searching "mainstream scholarship" ISBE yields 33 different search results, many of which are history tidbits.
Searching "mainstream scholarship" ISBE -1915 yields 10 different search results, one of which is referencing the online 1915 Edition.

Searching "International Standard Bible Encyclopedia" "non-calvinist" yields 27 different search results. Some of those search-results talk about non-calvinist baptist. I would like to avoid all Baptists.
Searching "new international dictionary of new testament theology" "non-calvinist" yields 24 different search results. Some of the search results talk about arminianism. I would like to avoid all Arminians.
Searching "New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible" "non-calvinist" 0 search results.
Searching NIDB "non-calvinist" 0 search results.

I don't like the Septuagint article in ISBE, see: http://www.christianforums.com/t31890-post571717/#post571717
Reply: http://www.christianforums.com/t31890-post585831/#post585831
... filosofer is a Bible translator.

Two reviews of ISBE: Opinions On This Resource
Amazon review of ISBE: "The ISBE contributors represent various evangelical positions. The set often includes articles that are barely evangelical, contributors frequently holding to inspiration but not inerrancy" http://www.amazon.com/review/R31VO0YYRNW3V8/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0802837859&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=
One review of the ISBE: http://books.google.se/books?id=6OJvO2jMCr8C&sitesec=reviews&hl=sv
... says: "It is jam packed with exegetical information such as language & historical meaning."
... another says: "Conservative"
I saw that ISBE is based on the RSV. That's OK. But it references also the KJV and that's really unnecessary.

ISBE (can be both the 1915 and the more recent Edition) is referenced two times more on Christianforums, than NIDNTT. Typical references from the ISBE are about baptism, the trinity, chastity, angels, and various OT factoids. NIDB is referenced 0 times there, but that might be due to that it's so recent:

Dan Francis said:

P A said:

Perhaps the ISBE   (The Modern version  not the 1915 version)

http://www.logos.com/product/3875/international-standard-bible-encyclopedia

Others are probably better placed to comment on this.

Yes I would say the revised ISBE is an ideal choice, it is a fine resource. That draws heavily on original languages, but not used in such away that a layman cannot understand and benefit. It is considered one of the best Evangelical Dictionary's

 

A quote about the NIDNTT: "The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology similarly states: “The N[ew] T[estament] does not contain the developed doctrine of Determinism." Source: http://jamsco.wordpress.com/category/both-ways/ 

BildPlats.se: Bildhosting. Ladda upp bilder gratis till din blogg,
MySpace-sida eller forum-inlägg! (Although no - I'm not close to JW and have never been JW.)

abondservant said:

Which faith tradition are you from?

 

Searching "New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible" wesleyan -wphonline -christianbook  -evangelicaltextualcriticism -mediacom -"publishing house" yielded 89 search results.
Both ISBE and NIDB are quite expensive, I really wonder if they are better than NIDNTT. Also, I don't need Biblical book introductions, as I have the end-of-2011 Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible as printed matter.
Here is a review of NIDB: http://ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com/ancient_hebrew_poetry/2009/08/a-review-of-the-new-interpreters-dictionary-of-the-bible.html

I found this information "The ISBE , though an extensive revision of the previous edition (1929), retained many articles from its predecessors (1915 and 1929)." Source: Library Journal: http://www.amazon.com/The-Anchor-Bible-Dictionary-Volume/dp/038542583X/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

I also found this information:
3. Colin Brown, ed., New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (4 vols.; 1975–78). This translates, revises, and expands Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament (ed. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther, and Hans Bietenhard; 1967–71). Zondervan originally published the English translation in three volumes, and it reissued NIDNTT in 1986 with a fourth volume that comprehensively indexes the dictionary. Articles discuss the usage of particular words under three categories: classical and secular Greek, the OT, and the NT. The dictionary focuses on theology and discusses other information like history if it is theologically relevant. The main headings list English words in alphabetical order (e.g., “Life”), and subheadings list Greek words in alphabetical order (e.g., βίος and ζωή).
Source: http://thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/review/zondervan_bible_reference_bundle

 Here is a lot more information about the NIDNTT: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/41621/310263.aspx#310263

 

OLD REVIEWS follow below, the reviews must be decades old and before the computer ages - hence a complaint about the lack of a scripture index:
About NIDNTT:

In 1965, the first fascicles of a new work began appearing in Germany: Theologische Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament (BNT), edited by L.Coenen, E. Beyreuther and the three volumes appeared

The team that produced it consisted primarily of conservative scholars, and the three volumes appeared in 1967, 1969 and 1971. Their purpose was to update and improve the as-yet-unfinished Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament. That work was deemed too massive and broad, and they sought to avoid several of the problems inherent in that work. First, they sought to abbreviate the massive size of the other and thereby to produce their work in a much shorter time. In this they certainly succeeded, as the three volumes were completed within six years compared to the forty yers it took for the earlier work. As a result there is greater uniformity ín both style and the quality of this work. Any comparison between the early and the later volumes of TWNT will illustrate the absence of later exegetical tools and sources such as Qumran from the early articles.

Second, we might note the classic criticism of TWNT by James Barr in the Semantics of Biblical Language (1961). He argued that the etymological approach of TWNT is artificial, since the meaning of a term does not depend on its history but on its usage within the period in which it is employed. Moreover, he discussed "illegitimate totality transfer," by which he meant the tendency to read the total semantic field into each particular use of a term. While this was rectified in later volumes of TWNT, it was glaringly apparent in the earlier ones.

BNT was written in light of such criticism. It attempts to rectify these by delineating the different uses of a term in various Biblical writers and books. This work also decreased the depth of discussion the classical period in order to devote more space to the Biblical material. While the classical section is much briefer in BNT than in its counterpart, the Biblical discussion is often longer.

Third, TWNT is organized on the basis of each individual Greek term, arranged alphabetically according to the Greek. As such, there is a great deal of overlap among synonymous terms. By contrast, BNT organizes itself semantically around related theological concepts (thus Begriffslexikon). This seeks to avoid redundancy and to aid the study of the concept rather than reading too much into the individual term. Whether or not it succeeds in this endeavor is a moot question (e.g., in the articles on "might" in vol. II and "strength" in vol. III of the English edition), but it is a step in the right direction. Further, BNT is organized around German rather than Greek terms, which makes it more accessible to the nonscholar. On the whole it is less technical and therefore less intimidating to the pastor and layman.

NIDNTT has continued the purpose and format of the German original. In each case it has updated the German edition, adding important exursuses, further articles and more recent bibliography to its precursor. The fact that is an English edition, of course, meawns a total reorganization, and articles from all three of the German volumes appear in each of the NIDNTT volumes. The organization is still quite similar to TWNT: Each article discusses the term first in light of it "classical"usage (CL), which covers not only classical Greek but also the Koine period; then its pre-Christian Jewish background (OT), which covers OT and complex intertestamental development and debates, including Qumran, LXX, rabbinic and apocryphal ideas; and finally its New Testament usage (NT), tracing the concept through the various Biblical writers.

In the three volumes there is a progressive separation of content and approach from the German original. The first volume expanded the glossaru of the German edition from 84 to 128 terms and added 39 new articles and entries to the 86 it revised. The second contained 22 totally new articles and 71 new entries on particular terms. The third contained 32 new articles and 87 new terms treated. The lenght of each volume has also increased, from 822 to 1023 to 1481 pages respectively.

One of the major critiques of NIDNTT by nonevangelical scholars has been the overwhelmingly conservative cast of the research team assembled by editor Colin Brown, formerly Trinity College, Bristol and now of Fuller Theological Seminary. R. E. Fuller in Int 32/2 (1978) 205 laments the fact that the team not only produces major additions from and evangelical position but also takes it upon themselves to "correct or tone down the more radical opinions of (their) German colleagues." For the evangelical, however, this is a welcome call to a higher degree of scholarship within evangelicalism as a whole. It is refreshing to be able to recommend a work of high quality to the evangical student without qualification and thereby to stimulate that student to a higher level of academic achievement. It is also exceedingly valuable to have answers to the complex problems of NT research collected in a single work.

Several aspects of this work make it a masterful teaching aid. The preacher who wishes to add Biblical theology to expository proclamation will find it extremely useful, simpler than TDNT and arranged on a conceptual rather than purely linguistic basis.
[...]
The overall quality of NIDNTT, in the mind of this reviewer, is indisputable. Its major weakness, however, lies in the somewhat artificial organization of its contents. G. Friedrich, in a major review article, "Das bisher noch fehlende Begriffslexikon zum neuen Testament," NTS 19 (1973) 126-152, states that any alphabetical arrangement is artifical, since the relationship between the major concepts (and, we would add, often between the Greek terms discussed within the concepts) are not delineated. Friedrich himself argued for an arrangement according to theological rather than alphabetical groupings. This is a valid criticism, and the student will often have difficulty distinguishing exactly where a concept is discussed.
[...]
All ina all, however, it must be stated that this is certainly one of the most important (if not the single most important) publication of the seventies for evangelical scholarship.

Two further suggestions might be tendered with regard to future editions of this magnificient set. First, and index of Biblical references would be an enormous help to exegetes and would save a great deal of time in research, since so many passages are discussed in several places. Second, a more liberal use of excursus articles, especially in the first two volumes, would greatly enhance the quality ofthe set. On would appreciate, for instance, articles on the deity of Christ, demonology and miracles. In conclusion, while NIDNTT can be improved somewhat, it is a must for pastor, layman and scholar - a truly remarkable achievement that belongs on the shelf of anyone serious about studying the Word of God.

 

About the Revised ISBE:

This new revision boasts over 250 contributors including such outstanding scholarss as Y. Aharoni, F. F. Bruce, K. Kitchen, B. Ramm, W. Stanford Reid, N. H. Ribberbos, Wilbur Smit, G. E. Ladd and D. Wisema. Approximately 40% of the 250 are contributors to the original ISBE
[...]
It is a boon for the nonlinguist to include a transliteration of all original language terms (which ZPEB and IDB do not include), but why did the editors not retain the Hebrew and Greek for the busy linguist?
[...]
There is a noticeable shift in methodology with respect to word studies. The old ISBE highlighted Scripture chapters. The new ISBE capitalizes and highlights variant renderings from other English translations. Not only is it difficult to locate a particular Scripture passage, or some Greek or Hebrew term amid the forest of capitals, but such capitalization seems pointless apart from the corresonding Scripture references and original language terms (cf. "Band" in IDB).

The new ISBE appears to be fairly well cross-referenced [...] but there is a tendency to cross-reference in only one direction for certain entries (e.g., "Accursed" to "Anathem" but not vice versa; "Belly"isot cross-referenced to "stomach" or "Womb"; neither is "Bartholomew" cross-referenced to "Nathanael").
[...]
The category of word studies is the weakest feature of this new revision. This must, in part, be due to the limits inherent in working from an English translation
[...]
Lack of thorougoing revision, consistency and care in a few areas has prevented this new revision from rising to the standard of evangelical scholarship needed to compete with today's fast-moving theological demands. Nevertheless, it remains at present the most up-to-date encyclopedia on the market. This fact, taken along with its quality evangelical scholarship, easy readability, excellent photographic reproduction, latest map techniques, breadth of coverage and reflection of trends in modern scholarship makes it a valuable tool for every serious student of Scripture.

Source for both entries: http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/23/23-2/23-2-pp143-188_JETS.pdf
... very large file, and it can't be searched or copied. 

Here's what I replied earlier on on page 1 in this thread...:

Unix living in celibacy said:

[NI]DNTT was moderate to liberal in its German form, but when translated and adapted in English, it was polished up a bit from a more conservative slant. Source: http://www.amazon.com/review/R3AW4SBMKFIBQ1/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1565630351&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag= :

Unix living in celibacy said:

Interesting! The original seems to be from 1967 with second Edition 1970. In German there seems to be recent (an) Edition(s) too. I wonder what the theological leaning of this English translation (NIDNTT) is?:

P A said:

http://www.logos.com/product/5463/new-international-dictionary-of-new-testament-theology 

...You can actually conclude some interesting information from the context of that quote...: "For what it's worth, Spicq appears to be the most theologically conservative of the four major theological dictionaries. TDNT and the Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (EDNT) are products of theologically moderate and liberal scholarship. DNTT was moderate to liberal in its German form, but when translated and adapted in English, it was polished up a bit from a more conservative slant. One example of this is Spicq accepts Pauline authorship of Ephesians and the Pastorals." ... i.e. that means that NIDNTT doesn't believe that the Pastorals and Eph was written by Paul, and that's really good as I was worried that [NI]DNTT would be too conservative!

Another note: I would have some use of it in classical Gk studies.

 

 

ISBE seems a bit too evangelical in that it: "the ISBE has a very detailed discussion defending the authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles."Source: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/22656/169095.aspx#169095
... on the other hand that can't have an overall influence on the dictionary, now can it?

NIDNTT or revised ISBE?

See also these replies: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/66390/464142.aspx#464142
http://community.logos.com/forums/p/66477/463890.aspx#463890

It seems so Mitchell. That, and which publisher it is, used to turn me off, as You can see from: Re: What lexicon to use with UBS Handbook set?. But today I changed my mind a little bit about the theological leaning of most of what the publisher publishes. Whyndell Grizzard offers a good reason for having it: The New Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible. So I placed a pre-order on NIDB (just before I read that reason). Btw, the progress-bar didn't move even one pixel!:

Mitchell said:

I've heard good things about the New Interpreter's series. From what I've heard secondhand (and from my limited use of the New Interpreter's Commentary) I would categorize it as a mainline commentary. It's more conservative than Anchor Yale, by a fair stretch, but not as strictly Evangelical as, for example, the Baker resources. I would imagine the dictionary follows suit:

Unix said:

Is there any cheaper option than New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols.)? What is the theological leaning of the latter?

 

Later on, when my Gk skills have improved a little, I'll also order Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (3 vols.). (I'm opening a savings account this month, and I have a huge expense soon due to how I lived long ago before I became Christian again in early 2011, so I don't have the liquidity to order the Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament right now.)

This will work as a combo. I did hesitate a lot regarding a Bible dictionary, but then started calculating yesterday morning or the day before that: it will probably take quite a while before any revision of say the revised ISBE or AYBD comes out and I wouldn't necessarily be satisfied with them anyway.

I confess that I'm a bit carried away by books. (I had a dream last night which meant that I'm just giving artificial respiration to my library and that it's like my doll. But I was rescuing, not playing.)

Additionally, now I have The Encyclopedia of Christianity <-- click that link to see how I got it cheap! :-)

Michael Childs said:

However, I don't see the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church as replacing the ISBE.  They have different purposes.