SILEX Revision Notes

The SIBI gloss corrects the etymology by noting that the root is uncertain and possibly pre-Greek, contrary to Strong's implication of a primary Greek verb. It also narrows the definition, clarifying that the term refers to natural, abundant growth rather than simply 'gushing' or 'sending forth,' and removes the translation tradition evident in Strong's KJV-influenced gloss.

The SIBI gloss corrects Strong's on two points: (1) The original gloss presents 'Gog' as a 'future Antichrist,' which is a theological interpretation not required by the text; the revised gloss removes this and treats Gog more neutrally as a prophetic or apocalyptic figure. (2) The original claims straightforward Hebrew origin, while the revised gloss notes the etymology is uncertain and possibly non-Hebrew.

The revised gloss corrects the original's specific identification of δαίμων as a 'devil' (definition, theological bias), clarifies that it is not necessarily evil, and cautions against identifying it with Satan. It also corrects the original's claim of a certain etymology, stating instead that the derivation is uncertain (etymology), and that in classical use the term was broader. The original reflects translation tradition and theological interpretation, while the revised gloss reflects modern lexical scholarship.

The revised gloss corrects Strong's theological bias by removing the label 'opponent of Christianity,' which is not inherent in the name's meaning. It also improves the definition by clarifying that the name is simply a personal name and not lexically tied to religious opposition. The revised etymology adds nuance, indicating uncertainty in the direct derivation, whereas Strong's presents it as a settled form.

The revised gloss corrects both the etymology (clarifying the components and origins, pointing out mistakes in the original's derivation) and the definition (removing 'to flog severely' as a valid rendering for Koine usage and affirming the literal meaning of 'to cut in two').

The revised gloss corrects Strong's in two areas: (1) etymology, by stating the root connection to δράκων is uncertain rather than assumed, and (2) definition, by removing the figurative sense of 'entrap'—which is not supported by contemporary sources—and restricting the meaning to physical grasping or seizing.

The revised gloss corrects both the etymology (original assumes a primary verb, whereas the revised notes the root is uncertain) and the definition (original links 'properly, to be weak' to the meaning, but the revised states it does not imply physical weakness, but rather yielding or compliance in context).

The revised gloss corrects both the etymology (noting the root is uncertain and only possibly related to ἀεί, rather than 'from the same as ἀεί') and the definition (clarifying that αἰών does not inherently mean 'eternal' or 'world' and that ascribing the sense 'eternal' may reflect later theological bias or translation tradition). It also points out the risk of imposing later theological meanings that are not present in the original Greek usage.

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology (original derives from a verb meaning 'to go'; revised says origin uncertain) and broadens the definition by clarifying that the term does not inherently imply citizenship or manumission, but more generally refers to freedom from servitude or restraint.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology, noting uncertainty about the second element's base, while Strong's asserts a presumed derivative. The definition is also corrected: 'intrude into' reflects a tradition-driven, possibly biased rendering, whereas 'to enter into, to investigate or explore' better captures the term’s figurative nuance without importing interpretive bias.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology, clarifying that the connection to ἐρεθίζω is not supported and emphasizing possible links to ἔριθος instead. It also narrows the definition, specifying that ἐριθεία refers to selfish ambition or factiousness rather than simply 'contention' or 'strife,' which are outcomes rather than inherent meanings. The original's translation tradition leans on the KJV rendering, which the revised gloss specifies is misleading.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology, rejecting the original's derivation from ἑτοιμάζω and emphasizing the root εὖ + πορεύομαι. It also clarifies the definition, limiting the meaning to material or financial sufficiency rather than general 'ability,' and notes the original's figurative leap to abstract 'ability' is inaccurate.

The SIBI gloss corrects the Strong's on two main points: (1) etymology—the original wrongly claims derivation from the base of θροέω and a derivative of ἅπτομαι, while SIBI points to θρίαμβος as the true (but ultimately uncertain and non-Greek) root; (2) definition—the original equates the verb with 'to conquer' or 'give victory,' conflating usage, whereas the revised gloss clarifies that the verb primarily means 'to lead in a triumphal procession' or to display the conquered, emphasizing the public celebration rather than literal conquest.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology by noting the origin is uncertain, unlike the original which suggests a root meaning 'to wail.' It also refines the definition, noting the verb means to make a loud, unsettling noise or to be disturbed/alarmed, and does not inherently carry a causative sense ('to frighten' or 'to trouble') as the original suggests.

The revised gloss corrects the original on two points: (1) etymology — the original claims a primary meaning related to 'rushing' or 'breathing hard,' while the revised gloss states the origin is uncertain and this derivation is not confirmed; and (2) definition — the original prioritizes ideas of blowing, smoke, and 'sacrifice by fire,' while the revised gloss states that these are derived from sacrificial practice, not the core meaning of the verb, which focuses on ritual slaughter or sacrifice.

The revised gloss corrects the Strong's derivation from αἱρέομαι (etymology) and removes the definition 'cheerful (as attractive),' clarifying that the word means favorable, gracious, or benevolent rather than cheerful (definition). It also identifies the usage as tied to Israelite liturgy and not general Greek, and clarifies the sense as an appeal or averted wish, not simply propitious or merciful.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology, stating the origin is unknown and not from εἴδω, whereas the original asserts a derivation from εἴδω. The revised definition also narrows and corrects the meaning, specifying 'equal' as exact equivalence or sameness, not mere similarity, correcting the original's broader sense of 'similar' or 'like.'

The revised gloss corrects the etymology, noting the word is genuinely Greek (not of Latin origin as Strong's claimed), and addresses translation tradition by highlighting that 'government' is potentially misleading, advocating for 'leadership' or 'administration' as better contextual translations for the early assembly scenario.

The revised gloss corrects the original on two points: (1) it rejects the etymological connection to 'λευκός' as incorrect, and (2) it states that 'candle' is an anachronistic translation since candles were not in use in the ancient Mediterranean, and the term refers to an oil lamp. Both the etymology and the translation are corrected.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology (it is not a strengthened form of μέλω; the original's derivation is linguistically inaccurate) and narrows the definition (original gloss overextends meaning to include necessity, probability, possibility, hesitation, etc., which SIBI notes are not inherent in the verb).

The revised gloss corrects the etymology (shows the term is ultimately from Akkadian via Semitic and Greek, not originally from Latin) and the definition (clarifies that 'mina' refers to a unit of weight and currency equivalent to about 100 drachmae/denarii and not to be confused with an English 'pound'). The original gloss is narrower and reflects a translation tradition that equates it with 'pound', which is misleading.

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology, stating the root connection is uncertain and only possibly linked to μιμνήσκω. It also removes the implication that the verb inherently means 'to reward or punish,' clarifying that such meanings arise only from context. Additionally, it drops the suggestion the verb is derived from 'μένω' or 'the base of μασσάομαι,' noting that the relationship to roots is debated. These are corrections in etymology and in definition.

The revised gloss corrects both the etymology (pointing out the word is derived from μόνος and γένος, not γίνομαι, thus rejecting the 'begotten' sense) and the definition (replacing 'only-born, only-begotten' with 'unique, only one of its kind'). It also addresses the translation tradition of 'only begotten' being based on a misunderstanding. The disagreement is both etymological and definitional, with implications for theological bias as well.

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology, stating that μῦθος is of uncertain or pre-Greek origin and not conclusively linked to μυέω, whereas Strong's suggests a derivation from μυέω. The revised gloss also offers a broader and more nuanced definition, challenging the narrow translation 'fable' in the original, which aligns with KJV translation tradition rather than the wider usage in Greek literature.

The revised gloss corrects Strong's etymology, noting that the derivation is uncertain and not definitively from 'hesitation.' It also clarifies the definition: while Strong's gloss reduces the word to slowness or delay, the revised gloss highlights the nuance of inner reluctance or psychological hesitation, arguing that is the primary sense rather than physical delay. Thus, both etymology and definition are materially corrected.

The revised gloss corrects both the etymology and the definition in the original gloss. It clarifies that there is no credible connection with ὄνομα ('name') or notoriety and disputes the suggested meaning of 'gratify' or 'have joy', specifying instead that the verb concerns benefiting or receiving help, not emotional pleasure.

The SIBI gloss rejects Strong's proposed etymology linking the word to ὄρος ('mountain') and clarifies the etymology is uncertain ('etymology'). It also removes interpretive extensions found in the original (such as happiness, power, eternity, and specifically the Gospel/Christianity), which reflect theological bias and translation tradition rather than lexical meaning ('theological_bias','translation_tradition').

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology, noting it is uncertain and that the suggested root from 'to see' is not established. It also corrects the narrow theological identification in the original—'especially Satan'—noting that the term does not inherently denote a supernatural being, and is metaphorical for adversaries or craftiness unless context indicates otherwise. Thus, the disagreement is in both etymology and theological bias.

The SIBI gloss corrects the etymology by rejecting Strong's claim that ὄχλος is derived from ἔχω, stating the true origin is uncertain. It also corrects the definition by removing Strong's implication of a negative sense ('rabble', 'riot'), clarifying that the term is neutral and refers only to a large group of people. This addresses both etymology and definition.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology (not 'of Chaldee origin' but borrowed via Aramaic and Hebrew), definition (primary meaning is 'adversary', not inherently 'devil'), and removes theological bias and translation tradition by stressing the term does not always refer to the supernatural being and warning against imposing later theology on every usage.

The revised gloss corrects the original in two key areas: (1) Etymology—Strong's suggests uncertain and linguistically unsupported connections to σκάπτω and concealment, while the revised gloss restricts it to a clear derivation from σκοπέω, excluding other roots; (2) Definition—Strong's includes meanings like 'watch (sentry or scout)' which the revised gloss states are not attested in Koine Greek usage, narrowing the definition to 'goal, target, mark' (literal/figurative objectives).

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology, stating that the derivation from πούς is not supported by current scholarship. It also addresses definition issues, noting that 'study' as 'be diligent' is outdated in English. Further, the revised gloss corrects translation tradition by clarifying that translation should distinguish between literal hastening and figurative eagerness, moving away from KJV-influenced glosses.

The SIBI gloss corrects the original etymology by stating the origin is uncertain and not directly related to ἵστημι, while Strong's speculates a probable derivation. It also corrects the definition and translation tradition: SIBI favors 'colonnade' or 'portico' over 'porch' for accurately reflecting the function and context, whereas Strong's uses 'porch,' reflecting older KJV tradition.

The revised gloss rejects the etymological connection to σῴζω ('to save') listed in the original, clarifying its origin is uncertain and this derivation is linguistically unsupported. The revised gloss also corrects the definition by omitting 'slave' as a direct gloss—explaining that 'slave' is not a default meaning but rather a rare, context-dependent figurative use. Additionally, the revised gloss provides a more accurate account of the term's literal and figurative applications, while the original oversimplifies its range. This constitutes both an etymological and definitional correction.

The SIBI gloss corrects Strong's by clarifying the etymology as uncertain rather than asserting a specific derivation, addresses a translation tradition issue by discouraging 'closet' as an anachronistic rendering in modern English, and narrows the definition to emphasize 'inner room' or 'private chamber' for privacy or storage rather than a space for 'secret meetings.'

The revised gloss corrects two points: (1) the original etymology, clarifying that the connection to τιμωρία is incorrect and offering a different possible root, and (2) the definition, broadening the meaning from just 'carpenter' to any skilled worker or builder, noting the broader historical usage.

The revised gloss corrects the etymology (the connection to 'ouros'/'guard' is uncertain) and the definition (the original focuses on 'protecting honor,' but the revised clarifies the term means to punish or avenge in a formal, judicial sense, not mere protection of honor).

The revised gloss corrects the original etymological claim, stating the root is uncertain and likely not from τρέχω. It also narrows the definition, removing the meaning 'life' and focusing only on the literal 'neck.'

The revised gloss corrects the etymology, rejecting the connection to τροπή suggested in the original. It narrows the definition, removing 'pamper' as not intrinsic to the verb's meaning, and notes absence of theological nuance. The original over-broadens the sense and includes unsupported etymological speculation.

The revised gloss corrects Strong's uncertain etymology, clarifying that the derivation from χαλάω is not attested. It also corrects the definition by removing 'furious,' which is not a necessary implication. Thus, there are both etymology and definitional disagreements.

The SIBI gloss corrects the Strong's gloss in several ways: (1) etymology: Strong's suggests a derivation from χαλάω and an association with hollowing out, which the SIBI gloss explicitly says is uncertain and likely incorrect; (2) definition/translation tradition: Strong's uses 'brass', which is anachronistic for the period, while SIBI clarifies that only copper or sometimes bronze (not brass) is meant; (3) translation tradition: Strong's includes the KJV tradition of translating coins or implements as 'brass' or 'money', while the SIBI gloss urges historically accurate renderings.

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology, stating that the etymological link to χειμών or χάσμα is unsupported, and clarifies that the connection to 'means or instrument' is only in rare figurative usage, correcting an overextension of definition in the original gloss.

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology by rejecting its derivation from χείρ and distinguishes χράομαι from similar-sounding verbs (χράω, χρῆ), clarifying that 'to give an oracle' and similar meanings are mistaken. The revised also narrows and corrects the definition, removing senses like 'entreat' and 'give an oracle,' which are due to traditional translation and confusion with other verbs, not the meaning of χράομαι itself.

The revised gloss corrects both etymology (not directly from ψηλαφάω but from an uncertain root) and definition/translation tradition (clarifies that 'voice' is interpretive, not literal; emphasizes the physical token as the original sense).

The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology (stating the root is uncertain, contra Strong's apparent derivation), and clarifies that ὠνέομαι is not synonymous with πίμπρημι, correcting Strong's assertion. These are material disagreements in both etymology and semantic relation.

The revised gloss corrects both the etymology (Strong's proposes a link to 'airō' that is now considered uncertain) and the definition (Strong's 'prayer' is incorrect; the revised clarifies it specifically refers to a curse or imprecation, not to prayer or positive invocation).

The SIBI gloss corrects the original's etymology, noting that the link to 'manliness' (from ἄρρην) is now considered unproven or unlikely. It also expands the definition, clarifying that the term is not limited to courage or masculine virtue, but refers more broadly to moral excellence or merit.

The revised gloss corrects (1) the etymology, stating the derivation from a superlative or ἄῤῥην is uncertain and likely incorrect; and (2) the definition/translation tradition, clarifying that 'ἄριστον' refers to a meal earlier in the day and warning that translation as 'dinner' reflects older English usage and can be misleading.

The SIBI gloss corrects the original's certainty about etymology, noting that the derivation from ἄγω is debated and uncertain. It also corrects the definition by clarifying that the term does not inherently mean 'anxiety,' but rather refers to competition or struggle. Thus, there are both etymological and definitional disagreements.

The revised gloss corrects the original on both etymological and cultural/translation issues. It rejects the proposed etymology from ἀρτέμων as unfounded and clarifies that 'Artemis' is not securely derived from any Greek root but has pre-Greek or Anatolian origins. It also corrects the use of 'Diana' as a direct equivalence, noting that such identification is a Roman imposition not linguistically or culturally precise for the original context in Ephesus.