Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics

by Moisés Silva

When first published in 1983, Biblical Words and Their Meaning broke new ground by introducing to students of the Bible the principles of linguistics, in particular, on lexical semantics -- that branch that focuses on the meaning of individual words. Silva's structural approach provides the interpreter with an important lexical tool for more responsible understanding of the biblical text and more effective use of standard exegetical resources. This revised edition includes a bibliographical essay by Silva, "Recent Developments in Semantics," and an appendix by Karen H. Jobes, "Distinguishing the Meaning of Greek Verbs in the Semantic Domain for Worship," that provides the reader with a substantive example of lexical study.

Genres: Biblical Studies, Language, Linguistics, Reference, Theology, Nonfiction, Christianity

228 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1983

About the author

Moisés Silva (PhD, University of Manchester) has taught biblical studies at Westmont College, Westminster Theological Seminary, and Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. He lives in Litchfield, Michigan.

Reviews

[Darryl Burling · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a helpful book to guide students of scripture on how to do (and more importantly) not to do word studies in the Greek New Testament. Silva discusses many of the pitfalls of word studies, mistakes made even by scholars looking at the meaning of words and provides helpful guidance for how to avoid them. At times this is quite technical and somewhat dry, but overall it is very helpful and should be required reading for serious students of scripture.

[Drake · Rating 5 out of 5]

This really is a brilliant little book. It reminds me in some ways of the first chapter of Carson's Exegetical Fallacies (the chapter on word fallacies); but rather than simply addressing a series of common mistakes, Silva provides a concise but extremely helpful overview of the field of lexical semantics as a whole. In other words, he doesn't just caution readers against sloppy word studies (though he does plenty of that); he also equips exegetes with a basic understanding of how words actually convey meaning within the structures of real languages. His constant illustrations and applications of these principles to the biblical text ensure that the reader is never left wondering about their relevance for interpreting Scripture. Silva is also a very precise thinker and a very good writer (I didn't expect to find myself chuckling at a book on lexical semantics, but there were a handful of good quips sprinkled here and there). This book sharpened my thinking in this area tremendously.

[Mark Jr. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Books on linguistics and biblical interpretation tend mostly to clear away accretions to our hermeneutical practices. You get done reading a book like this and you find yourself wishing it simply never had to be written. But people of the Book need to understand how its constituent parts—words—work.

[Charlie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Here is a simple test for determining whether this book is for you. If the phrase "lexical semantics" in the subtitle frightens or repels you, don't read it. If the phrase excites you or at least pique your interest, you're about to enter a treasure trove of philological fun.

[Jacob Aitken · Rating 4 out of 5]

Moises Silva begins by surveying the 20th century’s bizarre fascination with etymological theology: the structure of a single biblical word, usually in Hebrew, carried a world of theological meaning. This even went so far as the “Hebrew thought differently” than the pagan Greek (I actually believe there is a sense in which this is true, though not for the reasons that liberals thought it was. We will come back to this at the end).

The critique is best summarized by James Barr’s “illegitimate totality transfer.” Examples would include reading whole theologies of the church into Stephen’s use of ekklesia in Acts 7. In conclusion, Barr argues, “Theological thought of the type found in the NT has its characteristic linguistic expression not in the word individually, but in the word-combination or sentence” (quoted in Silva, kindle loc. 307).

What is the linguistic relationship between the LXX and the NT?

The answer divides into three parts: Hebrew-Greek lexical equivalences, the character of NT Greek, and LXX influence on NT vocabulary (loc. 811). Silva affirms that there is a Semitic background in the NT Greek, but one shouldn’t overplay the issue.

Half of this book is a very technical survey of 20th century linguistic theory. I’ve read some in that field, and even then I am not entirely sure what is going on. Much of it can probably be skipped.

He ends well, though. He gives the following template on finding the meaning of a biblical word. The bible student should completely ignore the history of a word’s development. Native speakers almost never care about that, and so it isn’t really helpful to the meaning.

(1) Greater extension (in a word’s range) entails a diminished intention (loc. 983). This also diminishes the role that the larger context plays on a word’s meaning.

(2) The student should determine to what extent the term is or isn’t referential (does it have a technical meaning?).

(3) Use a standard lexicon to determine the semantic range of a term.

(4) Consider the paradigmatic relations of the term. How would you classify it by its antonyms?

(5) Consider the syntagmatic combinations. How does it compare with related terms?

(6) Briefly consult its etymological history. Note if it has changed in meaning, but don’t tie the meaning to its development.

(7) What ambiguities would the writer have been aware of in using this term?

[Emmanuel Boston · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dated, but an otherwise good introduction to lexical semantics. Probably better to listen to a few philologist lectures on YouTube in our day.

[Jack W.]

The appendix he added for the second edition by a different author was the best part

[Tim Hazelbaker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful tool for learning how and when to handle etymology, how to assess context, and how to choose between possible meanings for disputed words. I've read twice, and both times I've learned invaluable, hopefully lifelong lessons for handling the text. Recommended for anyone in the practice of rightly dividing God's Word.

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

By no means an easy book. But useful to read. Here's my take away for the working pastor: if your interpretation of the passage rests on the nuance of a single word, be concerned…

[Dave Courtney · Rating 4 out of 5]

Biblical Words and Their Meaning acts as an introduction to lexical semantics (as proposed in the title). There is a point in which Silva recognizes the tension found in the overwhelming accessibility of resources and scholarship that has done much of the work of lexical semantics for us (and on which most of remain dependent). This tension begs the question of exactly what sort of audience would benefit from this introduction. Is it targeting those who are pursuing a career in mastering the Biblical languages? To what extent can the interests of "Biblical Words..." apply to the lay person, the minister/pastor, or the seminary student? I think the answer comes two fold. First, anyone can benefit from understanding the nature of how scholarship approaches Biblical Words and their Meaning, if at the very least to shed light on how many of us (especially those in ministry) tend to use these semantics in popular fashion (sometimes appropriately and often inappropriately). Secondly, for the seminary student, the lay reader, and the minister, Silva argues at the end of the book that all of us (should/must) bear some responsibility for measuring the work of scholarship/resources with our own ability to apply proper interpretative process. In other words, one does not need to be a scholar in order to ask appropriate questions of the text in front of us. We simply need the tools to be able to recognize how lexical semantics works within the text (something which Silva provides in an identifiable chart at the end of the concluding chapter).

In his opening words Silva points out that modern linguistics is different today than it was a hundred years ago. The process of modern linguistics is first recognized as a distinction between synchrony (the present or static state/relationship to a word/meaning) and diachronic (the historical or developing nature/state of a word/meaning). Etymological study (the process in which words change and develop their meanings) is the tool in which to recognize the distinction between these two forms. Silva suggests that in the modern movement of Biblical semantics there is a growing awareness of the (lack of) ability of etymology to expose the appropriate context of a word/phrase in Biblical word study/exegesis. One of the areas that ministers (in specific) often misapply a basic approach to understanding the Greek language is in being overly dependent on cliche uses (in sermons and otherwise). For example, you might hear a pastor refer to the original meaning as "this" or "that", and thus assume the association of this meaning on the current word (often the english translation) in view. Silva goes on to suggest "less careful ministers give themselves over to excesses" regarding the minimalist attention we feel necessitated (and forced) to give to the Greek language. Silva goes on to say that this is not just a problem with lay people and ministers, but stems from some abuses in professional scholarship as well. All of this is suggested to point out Silva's main contention, which is that the most important recognition is synchrony (the present relationship and understanding of a word), and while diachronic and etymology can shed light on a words development, this does not automatically assume much (if anything) on the synchronic interpretation.

Silva is not out to make some grand point on the abuses of lexical semantics by the church, ministers and lay people. In fact, he is entirely sympathetic to the challenges of Biblical interpretation. At one point he laments that the entire process is one of appropriated direction and process, not necessarily a declaration that the tools (in his book) can lead to the "right" interpretative processes and meanings. As you move through the book he outines the challenges that all Biblical readers face. In non-Biblical sources one can more adequately utilize comparative research to recognize the relationship of certain words to be predominant and influential across multiple cultures. In the Biblical word the Greek is more removed, and thus less engaged with the common process of "borrowing". As well it represents a concern for a theology that was radically different than most (if not all) cultures surrounding the Biblical communities. "The attitude of such men towards human life, towards nature, and towards God was so different that though Greek words were used they were the symbols of quite other than Greek ideas." In this sense Silva goes on to point that "Biblical Greek (is thus) a language which stands by itself (related to the Semitic mind)." "The earliest Christian writers, in proclaiming the new faith, had to express in words deep theological ideas, unheard of in the Old World."

Above all we have the challenge of interpretation across translating boundaries (in which a big focus is given to the LXX and the influence it had on the Biblical authors (the Greek being having a more complicated and changing history than the Hebrew). Silva points out that modern scholarship recognizes that in approaching the LXX as having a grand influence on the Biblical writers, it should not be seen has having such a grand influence over the New Testament "language". That is to say, if synchronic interpretation is the most important factor, the LXX is more influential in representing the changing "context" of the author rather than challenging our ability to connect linguistically to the meaning of the language itself. These should be recognized as two different challenges and concerns when approaching scripture. This brings to light the necessary place of context, which can be discovered amidst the affecting aspects of "phonology, vocabulary, syntax and discourse". Silva describes this as a distinction between regularity and variability. These things also affect the relationship to the Greek with the Hebrew language. "One cannot assume, to begin with, that if we identify the Hebrew word corresponding to the Greek word being studied, the meaning of the latter is thereby established. It would of course be a mistake to ignore the Hebrew altogether, but we must maintain a sensitive balance between the meaning of a word in secular Greek and the desire of the translator to preserve the thrust of the original."

There are some helpful hints that Silva offers to point us in the right direction. In his chapter on etymology he points out that the benefit of Greek (and Hebrew) as a generally transparent language (the meanings aren't heavily disguised, and thus can remain somewhat connected over time). He also suggests that rather than coming down hard on ourselves (or others) for interpretative blunders, that despite the truth of linguistics/semantics, in most cases we are probably not as far off from the meanings as we might feel we are (especially after reading a book like this). "Changes in history that lead to changes in the meaning of words" is something Silva suggests we need to recognize, but from within the framework (again) of synchronic understanding being the most important. We need not get lost in the changes that occur with context, the use of metaphor (the most common type of semitic change) and structural considerations. "The time has come when our efforts to understand the evolution of languages, on the one hand, and their structure at a given period, on the other, can and must be co-ordinated. The aim must be to follow the whole structure of the language in its process of gradual transformation. Linguistic science, in a new phase of its evolution, will thus become structural history."

We can engage with these complications (in the exercise of lexical semantics) with the hope of getting closer to the meaning and context of the words and authors. Here Silva devotes time to giving us the tools that can give us some confidence in engaging with Biblical language appropriately. This is centered on what he refers to as Ogden Richard's famous triangle, which outlines the three way relationship with symbol (word), sense (mental response) and referent (thing). Much of what he walks us through as a reader refers back to the foundation that he has built, which is to engage us with deciphering the differences between attention to etymology and attention to the present semantic attention. These areas have two separate concerns in mind and do not necessarily need to speak to the other in any significant way. All "words" are complicated in their relationship between the three areas of the triangle, but in the end the meaning in its appropriate present context (and all that unconsciously bears both for the writer and the reader). "Most semantic sudies have been primarily concerned with the relationship between symbol and sense."

The greater piece of wisdom that Silva wants to impart is simply that a reader (of any sort) remain aware that in the grand scheme of things the resources we are using to do the work of semantics for us have gotten their information from somewhere else. They have done their work, but in the end all scholarship is an interpretative exercise, something that we all should engage in (and recognize) any time we read scripture for ourselves. We can do this with a degree of confidence, without feeling like the complications do away with our ability to decipher "the word" in scripture as not just a meaning but also a historical event. But we do a greater justice to the Biblical material when we distinguish between language and theology, and present and historical application. Further, there remains the possibility for danger in casual approaches to lexical semantics for framing theological responses and concerns which can end up destructive and misleading rather than helpful and appropriate in our understanding of the larger Biblical framework (including context, character, and our understanding of God Himself). We might be tempted in exasperation over the complicated activity of appropriate Biblical interpretation to decry it as "merely semantics", as if semantics were a word that can be tossed aside as irrelevant or unnecessary. In the practice of engaging with Biblical words and their meaning, semantics may be the most important tool we have.

[Rodney Harvill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whenever I read D.A. Carson, I feel as if I have stepped, not into the deep end of the pool, but off the continental shelf. I had that feeling most of the time while reading this book. Dr. Silva goes deep, really deep, in his discussion of lexical semantics, both syntagmatic (how words interact with context) and paradigmatic (how words contrast with and otherwise interact with other words within their semantic domain) concerns. There is also an appendix written by Karen Jobes that analyzes the different Greek words used in the New Testament for worship. While there are some practical examples of lexical analysis in the main body of the book, the appendix represents pure application of the principles outlined by Dr. Silva and was easier for my application-oriented engineer brain to understand.

One thing that really stood out to me was Dr. Silva’s willingness to challenge conventional wisdom. For example, I have heard over and over that the Greek present tense represents continuous or habitual action. He points out that for present action, regardless of aspect, the Greek language provides only one choice, the present tense. So, how much significance is there when the present tense is used if it is the only available choice? Shouldn’t we be looking for contextual clues, such as μήκετι, to provide support for continuous or habitual action. I don’t believe in being a rebel without a clue, a rebel for the sake of mere nonconformity. Dr. Silva is being a bit of a rebel here but appears to have a good reason, a barn-door size hole in the logic of some conventional wisdom or even an attempt to theologize grammar, such as relying on sintax to solve the theological conundrum of how a believer can no longer sin when sin by believers is an everyday occurrence (Every explanation I have seen relies on present tense verbal aspect.). An engineer, I appreciate this. In my world, holes in reasoning can lead to engineering failures, but in Dr. Silva’s world, they can lead to theological failures. Which has higher consequence, earthly matters or heavenly matters? I know how I would answer that question.

I would like to close my review by noting a point made by Dr. Jobes in her appendix on Greek words used to denote different aspects of worship. In Romans 1:25, Paul describes those who have “exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worship (σεβάζομαι) and serve (λατρεύω) the creature instead of the creator.” σεβάζομαι, the middle/passive form of σεβάζω, is used nowhere else in the New Testament, nor in the Septuagint. So, why did Paul choose to use it here? Dr. Jobes cites Dio Cassius, Roman Histories, for an argument that the title Augustus corresponds to Greek σεβαστός, from the passive of σεβάζω. In other words, Paul was using the cult of the emperor as an exemplar of worshipping and serving the creature. This really impresses me. In Romans 13, Paul would go on to instruct Christians to submit to Caesar, but in chapter 1, he is setting the groundwork for clear boundaries around proper submission to the ruling authorities. They get submission but not worship (σεβάζομαι) or acts of piety (λατρεύω). That appendix was a great demonstration of how to apply the principles Dr. Silva delineates throughout the book.

[James Fields · Rating 4 out of 5]

Every Moisés Silva book I’ve ever picked up begins with “this book is for second year seminary students.” I find such statements to be a bit condescending. Will I understand everything in your book, probably not. But is it worth the effort, probably so!

In this book I found both those statements to be true. Moisés uses something like seven different languages to make his points, and few seminary students if any would know all those languages and be able to follow those points natively. Where I struggled to understand a language, context carried the meaning well, and I came out wiser at the end. I’ve been learning my biblical languages recently, and plan on returning to this book again later once I have them down a bit more so that I can glean even more knowledge from this book.

One of the first topics Silva covers is the importance of Etymology. Some words have a supposed etymology that has no basis in reality & others have an ancient etymology that is not relevant to today’s meaning (ex. “nice” comes from the Latin word for imbecile & no one even knowing that origin is trying to say anything other than nice). But there are some words were the etymology is super important, so we need to maintain balance in our translation. This means that the translator of Scripture must be careful in their word choice. Just because a word meant one thing two hundred years before your work was written, doesn’t mean it still means that today. Another example of that in English today would be the word “gay.” Novels written a hundred years ago use that word very differently than novels written today.

Another vital piece that can help us understand the meaning of Scripture is the LXX. It’s the first known translation of the Hebrew Tanakh (aka Old Testament) and it’s translated into Greek. This is a vital piece of text to study and a confusing one. Many different translators were used so the methodology from one book to the next may vary strongly. Looking at the way Hebrew was translated is not reliable as some words were done literally and others figuratively. It is unclear if the New Testament writers bases their quotations on the LXX. In some areas it seems to be a word for word quote (as evidenced by some strange translation choices in the LXX), but in other instances it is definitely not the source of their quotes.

The discerning translator can use the LXX to better understand both Hebrew and Greek, but again must show great caution in doing so.

One of the most powerful points Silva makes is pointing out the difference between words in different languages. In English to you eat soup, but in Spanish you drink it. But they don’t mean to drink it like we think of it, they’re still eating it. So there’s a cultural emphasis on these words that’s more subtle. In English we care about the mode of consumption, whereas in Spanish the words have more to do with the consistency of the food (you also “drink” ice cream). When you look at this concept compared to the Bible there are some other words that stand out. The word we translate “hand” means the area from the elbow to the tips of the fingers, but in English the hand is from the wrist to the tips of the fingers. Similar problems arise with things like “day” and “night” and all kinds of other concepts and words.

When we today say “the Bible is clear” or “I don’t need a theologian to understand the Bible” we’re overstating things a bit. Sure the Bible is written so that all can understand it, but some concepts get lost in the language translation, others in the cultural dissimilarities, and others in our biases and traditions. A thorough understanding of a passage is possible, but it does require wrestling not just with a basic understanding on language and culture, but a deep one.

Walking away from this book gave me a much deeper appreciation for the complexity and depth of Scripture. My desire to the learn the biblical languages grew and to spend time reading it as it was written. This thin little book gives even the language neophyte a basic understanding of the complexities and difficulties that even scholars fall into in reading the text.

I’m reminded of a time I heard a sermon on a New Testament passage and the pastor said this section of Scripture is poetic in the original language. Curious I went up to him and asked him what he meant by it, and he said it rhymes. In Greek the words have a finite number of endings that are chose based on the number of things involved and the voice of the passage – rhyming is a natural effect of the language for this reason and is not considered a factor in if something is poetic. The pastor had fallen into a simple trap, he’s learned to read it and as he did he heard the sounds and recognized similar endings and assumed English poetry rules on this ancient dead language. It’s an easy mistake, and gives us ample reason to be careful and cautious as we approach Scripture.

All together, I found this book very enlightening. I definitely was of the mindset before reading this that “the Bible is clear” and largely I think that’s true, some pastors have pointed to Psalm 19:7-9 to make this point. BUT as clear as Scripture is, the fact that we’re drinking its rich waters through the lens of a translator and absent much of the culture muddies the waters. What we see in our English Bibles is a useful tool, but not the whole picture.

[Will Morris · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you don’t think this book sounds interesting, don’t read it. But you should think it sounds interesting. And if you do you should read it, and your understanding of biblical word studies will benefit greatly from it.

[Kristie Bade · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding read. Highly recommend!

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably overly dense for someone with no background in linguistics or the biblical languages, but nevertheless very helpful. It seems to me to be a very helpful tool in pointing out how language works and how preachers might avoid committing various exegetical fallacies. A couple quotations that I thought were helpful:

One rarely finds a minister who can read a given piece of Hellenistic Greek at sight. The typical seminary graduate usually knows enough Greek to read most New Testament passages with relative ease (though for this he is more dependent than he realizes on his previous knowledge of the contents); he also is able to follow linguistic arguments and to discuss intelligently grammatical and lexical problems.
In the course of his sermon preparation, a minister may feel obligated to use his knowledge of Greek. If he is unable to draw from a true familiarity with the structure of the language, he may say, “The original here means. ...” But what does it mean? The congregation already knows what it means, for they have just read their English version. So the minister often makes comments on the etymology of the word. If the word happens to be ἁμαρτία, it means not just 'sin’ but ‘missing the mark’; if it is ὑπομένε��ν, it means not just ‘to endure’ but ‘to remain under.’ If the word is ἐκκλησία, it means not just ‘church’ but ‘those who are called out.’ (page 44–45)

If we can establish that an author has used ambiguity for literary purposes, then our problem is resolved. On the other hand, if the ambiguity is accidental, we face the sometimes difficult task of deciding which meaning was intended by the author. To recognize that the decision can be difficult helps clarify and qualify our earlier insistence that context is determinative of meaning — we can hardly suggest that a quick look at the immediate context will resolve all doubtful cases. On the other hand, we cannot afford to ignore that these difficulties occur only sometimes. Since our attention is normally drawn, by the very nature of the case, to doubtful passages, we may be left with the impression that ambiguity is a pervasive phenomenon. We need to remind ourselves, therefore, that while almost every word in Scripture is more or less polysemous if considered in isolation, that potential for ambiguity normally does not even occur to an individual in the course of reading substantive portions. (page 151)

[Reinhardt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Good introduction to lexical semantics and its limitations. Relegates a lot of exegesis to the dustbin of linguistics analysis. Things have improved in the 30 years since it was published, but you still see many of the same mistakes propagated.

The books looks at the strength and weaknesses of a conceptual vs linguistic approach and what each approach can or cannot do. Talks about he TDNT a lot, both its value and its blind spots. Provides an enlightening example of Spanish to English translation. A Spanish speaker could easily assume that the English eat means eat and drink because the Spanish drink their soup, and eat their bread but both would be eat in English. This doesn't mean that the English word eat means eat or drink even though it would translate both. An illuminating example when applied to the different semantic range of a language as different from English as NT Greek.

Also states the obvious (after it had been pointed out) that sometime different word are used to mean the same thing strictly for stylistic variation. Explores semantic range, use of synonyms, antonyms, etymology and many other linguistic concepts.

It concludes with an excellent list of step to approach lexical semantics to determine meaning. An abbreviated list: 1. Determine if it is a technical word, 2 determine range of possible meanings, 3. Determine synonym and oppositional words, 4. Consider use in syntactic combinations, 5. Consider if the meaning has changed over time, 6. Think about the writers intention. Of course the book fleshes out the detail and the logic behind this as well exploring some lexical dead ends.

Written at a technical level, but understandable to anyone with a general understanding of linguistics and some Greek helps. Knowing more than one year of (rusty) Greek would help as the examples are in Greek with most not translated.

A lot of valuable information for anyone in theological study. Not sure if this has been surpassed.

[Ethan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fairly technical application of developments within linguistics to the field of Biblical lexical semantics in terms of both Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek.

The author is attempting to correct misunderstandings and misapprehensions based on past conceptions of linguistics and how language works and what words mean as well as explaining how linguistics and a more advanced understanding of lexical semantics can assist the Bible student and expositor in more effectively and accurately explaining why words mean what they mean, how they relate to context, the relationship between a word's origin and meaning, etc.

A lot of technical words are presented to the reader in swift succession; such is necessary since this is a more technical guide to the field but makes it more challenging to really absorb what the author is saying in one take.

The author is fully engaged with contemporary scholarly discussion on the issues at hand; he makes plain his views on the various matters. I am not well versed enough in the discussion to discern where the author's position is stronger or weaker but he does argue his case well.

A useful resource for those who would attempt to explain Scripture on the basis of the meaning of words.

[E · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would read anything Silva has written. This work will not let you down. Note that is it narrow in scope: if you're interested in the exegesis of passages, the meaning of discourses, the interpretation of thoughts, clauses, or phrases, this may disappoint you. But it ought not, because all those units are based on words. And the meaning of words is what this work is all about. It is theoretical, light on application or case studies. In fact, in this second edition, Silva responded to that criticism by adding a study of NT words for worship by Karen Jobes, one of the best exegetical theologians working today (her commentary on 1 Peter should not be missed).

So, what things do you need to keep in mind when determining what a word "means"? Here's a short list: ellipsis, metaphor, metonymy, polysemy, homonymy, derivation, protolanguage, incompatibility, antonymy, synonymy, hyponymy. And that's just the start. I am glad to discuss any topic that one has questions about.

[Charles Cole · Rating 1 out of 5]

Biblical Words and Their Meaning

I was quite dissatisfied because I thought this was a book of word meanings. But it was a book discussing various authors philosophical approaches to word meanings. In graduate school I read some these authors. What are the possibilities of my receiving credit for this disappointing book?

[Jesse · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not going to lie, this book was not my favourite. Having said that, while my eyes were propped open to read it, it has really opened my eyes (try and exegete that sentence, I dare you). Really, really important ideas contained in this book, just not in my area of expertise so a wee bit beyond me. I reckon it probably deserves 5 stars, if I had really understood it.

[Colin Smith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Anyone who loves language must be attracted to the study of semantics. And if you love Biblical languages (like me), then the study of Biblical Semantics is very appealing. This book is absorbing, entertaining, and an excellent guide to this field of study.

[Theodros · Rating 5 out of 5]

Every pastor and teacher who interprets and teaches the bible must read this if he wants to feed his sheep

[William Dicks · Rating 4 out of 5]

You can read a quick review of this book at my blog.

[Leandro Dutra · Rating 5 out of 5]

A needed corrective to much Greek exegesis and other text interpretation challenges. I hope to come back to this once I learn Koiné.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book that helps one thing about how they should translate various Biblical words. A good reminder to not just blindly take the definitions provided in the Lexicon.

[Matt Quintana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Not necessarily the most exciting read, but a must for anyone committed to the study of biblical languages.

[Christopher Chandler · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dense, but helpful for thinking through tough exegetical issues.

[Samuel Bierig · Rating 5 out of 5]

I see why this was a game changer type book. It is somewhat technical, but yet very helpful in its overall thrust. If you're interested in the subject matter, then this is a systemic piece. Tolle lege