What Is a Good Bible Dictionary?

054

055

Since the 1960s Bible dictionaries have been appearing in record numbers. In 1985 the Society of Biblical Literature joined with Harper & Row in the production of one of the handsomest. The venture itself was noteworthy: A scholarly society worked out terms with a commercial publisher to share the production and the proceeds of a scholarly work, the entire contents of which the society and its members contracted to provide.

This year, one of the world’s largest producers of Bibles, Thomas Nelson Publishers, put together a very attractive and comprehensive Bible dictionary, the product of the labors of five editors and 80 other scholars.

Also in 1986, one of the major publishers of religious books, Abingdon Press, published a new form of Bible dictionary—straining the genre, in fact—a dictionary of Bible and religion, covering subjects not normally treated in works of this type.

What is this genre—Bible dictionary? It is different from a Bible encyclopedia, which usually has full treatments of Biblical and theological materials and usually consists of several volumes. The familiar Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (IDB), a four-volume work published by Abingdon Press, with a supplementary volume added later, is in fact a Bible encyclopedia. The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, a five-volume work of similar character to the IDB, produced for and largely written by conservative Protestants, is another good example of an encyclopedia of the Bible.

Bible dictionaries also differ from the one-volume or the two-volume commentary on the Bible. Bible commentaries emphasize the individual books of the Bible, each of which receives introductory treatment and a running interpretation. Numerous general articles also appear in Bible commentaries, some of which cover the same ground as articles in Bible dictionaries.

Bible dictionaries must also be distinguished from Bible atlases, although to some extent they too overlap. A much more vague category is the Bible handbook; such works contain useful information about how to study the Bible and offer a miscellaneous list of information on Biblical history, geography and daily life.

Classically, the Bible dictionary is a one-volume work of several hundred pages (over 1,000 pages in two-column format in recent exemplars). It contains identifications and explanations of the terms, persons, places, ideas and things found in the Bible. Some may cover the Apocrypha^a as fully as they cover the books of the Bible itself; others will not. In addition, Bible dictionaries always contain entries that help to place the Biblical materials in their historical and cultural setting so that the Biblical text will more fully yield its meaning. As one-volume works, Bible dictionaries must be both comprehensive and succinct. Biblical terms should not be omitted, but great care must be exercised in assigning limited space to particular subjects and kinds of subjects. General articles sometimes group the physical evidence related to the Bible so that certain categories—for example, flora and fauna, jewelry, musical instruments—can be seen together and compared. Treatment of archaeological sites normally comes in the form of short articles under the Biblical name of the site; the articles include information about when and by whom the excavations were carried out, the chief findings, and the import of these for an understanding of the Biblical events connected with the site. In addition, articles on Biblical or Palestinian archaeology appear, providing information on archaeological method and on the values and limitations of archaeological research for the interpretation of the Bible.

The scope of some Bible dictionaries may include the Bible’s theological herisage, and, therefore, these dictionaries will include doctrinal and theological terms and concepts that would not appear in other Bible dictionaries. Evangelical Bible dictionaries often show this characteristic.

In recent times, some Bible dictionaries have been produced with an eye to the market for college textbooks in religious studies programs. A Bible dictionary might well serve as the students’ only supplemental volume to the Bible, or to the Bible and an introduction to the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament. We can see the effect of this market consideration in recent Bible dictionaries, and it is not at all unwholesome. The Bible dictionary is becoming more and more a tool consulted 056daily by the college or seminary student.

One other change in the Bible dictionary is just beginning to appear. In an effort to keep together religious studies and Biblical studies, Abingdon has produced its Dictionary of Bible and Religion. Here, the college religious studies program is clearly in view. Students and teachers have ready access, in one volume, to definitions and explanations covering Biblical, historical, theological, ethical and history-of-religion subjects. The venture is a bold one; it remains to be seen how the work will be received.

Bible dictionaries are surely being purchased in large numbers today; if they weren’t, we wouldn’t have so many new ones—with others soon to appear.

Is there a “best” dictionary of the Bible currently on the market? Or do the viewpoints and purposes of the various publications differ so markedly that comparisons prove not to be very useful?

Although there may not be a single “best” dictionary, it does seem valuable to compare the qualities of recently published dictionaries to see which ones stand out.

Eight one-volume dictionaries of the Bible will be reviewed here. Three are briefer, aimed at a large mass readership; these three do not purport to be scholarly works, although of course they are intended to provide accurate and up-to-date information. Their principal audience is the Sunday school teacher, the Bible college student and the interested lay public. Pastors too may find these works valuable as ready reference tools.

The other five Bible dictionaries that will be evaluated are all somewhat longer than the first group of three and are aimed at a more scholarly audience—students of the Bible in colleges and theological schools, clergy, Biblical scholars and theologians. Of these, two are the product of the work of evangelical or conservative Protestant groups (Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary and the New Bible Dictionary). Two are produced by ecumenical and interfaith groups (Dictionary of Bible and Religion and Harper’s Bible Dictionary) and seek to present the materials without direct 057reference to a particular religious position. One of the five (New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible) is the work of a single author, assisted by a colleague who took responsibility for the illustrations.

In the following pages, the merits and limitations of each of the eight dictionaries will be described. At the end of these descriptive paragraphs, a numerical evaluation summarizes key features of each dictionary.^b An at-a-glance chart compares the eight dictionaries as to length, price, maps, and some general characteristics of content.

Longer Dictionaries

Dictionary of Bible and Religion (DBR)

William H. Gentz, editor

(Abingdon, 1986) 1,147 pp., 16 plates.

The Dictionary of Bible and Religion, just published by Abingdon, combines the qualities of a Bible dictionary and a dictionary of religion. Naturally, there are consequences. It cannot be as inclusive a treatment of the Bible as one finds in most of the large one-volume dictionaries. Selection therefore becomes critical. DBR has been rather successful in selecting the chief terms both from the Biblical field and from the world of religion. But readers will be disappointed, time and again, as they confidently look for terms they expect, only to find that they have been omitted. For example, no article appears on music or musical instruments, on agriculture, plants or minerals.

The dictionary nevertheless has many excellent qualities. Readers of the Bible today often wish to compare Biblical notions and practices with those in other religions; DBR allows for that comparison, a unique feature among the 058dictionaries under review. There is also virtue in producing a dictionary with the aid of only a limited number of scholars, assigning many articles to each and letting the scholars therefore take responsibility for a very large part of the volume’s contents. DBR has done that: Only 28 contributors, with the editor, have produced this dictionary. The articles are signed, so that readers know exactly who is responsible for the entry. Of course, few scholars can cover with equal competence the very large areas of research for which these contributors have had to take responsibility; there are unevennesses in the quality of the articles produced, but the overall quality is high indeed.

The writing style is excellent; inclusive language is used throughout. The format of the volume is equally attractive. Two lined columns, lined at top and bottom as well as along both sides, with excellent paper and clear type make pages that are very appealing to the eye. Binding and art work are superb. The maps of the ancient Near East are of excellent quality, but there are no maps of the remainder of the world covered by the dictionary—a most surprising fact. There are no bibliographies, unfortunately, not even for the most lengthy and important entries.

It is clear from this brief review that DBR is more of a dictionary of the Bible than it is of religion. Even so, the editor and his colleagues have packed an enormous amount of material on the history and thought of Christianity into this dictionary. Many individuals in religious history and on the contemporary religious scene appear in brief biographical sketches here. Central elements of the religions of Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and other religious traditions are treated, though with many, many gaps. There is no entry on myth, no treatment of African or Australian or North or South American religious traditions and practices. But if the volume proves to be as helpful as this reviewer expects it to become, subsequent editions can supply many of the omissions.

Scholarship: 4

Clarity: 5

Maps: 4

Illustrations: 3

Production: 5

Harper’s Bible Dictionary (HBD)

Paul J. Achtemeier, editor

(Harper & Row, 1985) 1,178 pp., 18 plates.

The Harper’s Bible Dictionary is the happy outcome of a collaboration between the Society of Biblical Literature and Harper and Row. Harper and Row agreed to replace its existing Bible dictionary with an entirely new one of different format and character. Paul J. Achtemeier, former executive secretary of the Society of Biblical Literature and a much respected New Testament scholar, was joined by four associate editors to plan the work and bring it to completion. One hundred and seventy-nine scholars provided the content of the dictionary. All of the articles of any length are signed, though one has to search through a long list to find the name of the person whose initials are given.

The plan of the work is excellent. A small number of major articles are printed in a single column in type larger than the usual two-column type. Bibliographies are severely limited, but do appear here and there, although it is difficult to discover the principle followed in giving or not giving space for bibliographical entries. Some articles, too, are of such summary character as not to be of much help, while others are very full indeed. It may be that the assignment of space for the respective articles was done too quickly, with insufficient comparisons with other dictionaries.

It is clear, nonetheless, that HBD is an excellent Bible dictionary—up-to-date, thorough for the most part, well-written and well-produced, easy to read and to use. The work is at its best in its coverage of various methods of Biblical research that are enjoying a new prominence today: structuralist approaches, newer literary and rhetorical approaches, sociological and anthropological studies, as well as the familiar textual, literary-critical, historical and formal approaches. Some of the newer approaches could have been used more in the articles dealing with the Biblical books. The newer approaches were clearly not uniformly applied in the various treatments of the literature (see, for example, the articles on major prophetic books).

But this variety in approach also reflects the different ways the Bible is studied in the international scholarly community today, as well as in the Society of Biblical Literature. The editors have rightly not tried to impose a single standard way of treating the different subjects. Critical Biblical scholarship is everywhere in evidence; however, no effort has been made to write within the boundaries of particular theological structures. Roman Catholic and Jewish scholarship is as prominent in the work as Protestant scholarship, and many shades of theological outlook are also clearly represented, though the dictionary does not give much place to some of the concerns of evangelical or conservative communities. No article is included on inerrancy or infallibility, or on Biblical literalism; such an article would have offered a good opportunity to distinguish various approaches to Biblical interpretation. Some articles may go out of their way to expose what is taken to be credulity; see, for example, the article on the Shroud of Turin (p. 948) which states that the shroud was “first discovered in France in the 14th century” and “has no known history before that.” The article goes on to assert that there were many crucifixions in ancient times; were the shroud shown to be from the first century, it might still have been worn by any one of several thousand persons.

The HBD could have given greater attention to flora and fauna, to bringing together the complex Biblical evidence on the meaning of gemstones, musical instruments, and the like. Individual articles deal with particular animals, plants, birds, and jewels; but the lack of general articles is regrettable. The article on music and musical instruments does go far toward meeting the need for gathering up the particulars in a single place. HBD also usually fails to give the particular Hebrew and Greek words under discussion (though not in the “music” article), an omission that translators will feel keenly.

But HBD is still a magnificent Bible 059dictionary, perhaps the best currently in existence in most respects. It is up-to-date (see the fine article on Ebla, for example), has excellent maps with a fine index, outlines the books of the Bible very clearly and attractively, covers archaeological subjects very well indeed, and is a mine of information for the beginning Biblical student, the seasoned scholar and the interested layperson.

Scholarship: 5

Clarity: 4

Maps: 5

Illustrations: 4

Production: 4

Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary (NIBD)

Herbert Lockyer, Sr., editor

(Thomas Nelson, 1986) 1,128 pp., 9 plates.

Thomas Nelson Publishers has produced the most recent Bible dictionary in the customary format. Based on the text of the New King James Version, also published by Thomas Nelson, this Bible dictionary is written for the nonspecialist by a team of evangelical Protestants. The articles are unsigned, which may mean that the editorial staff took greater initiatives in shaping the contributions of individual scholars than was the case in the dictionaries discussed above.

This is a comprehensive dictionary, with many cross references, profusely illustrated with color photographs, line drawings, maps and charts. The maps are readable, but not pleasing to the eye. Nor are there as many maps or as detailed presentations in the map collection as one finds in the other major Bible dictionaries under review here.

Some of Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary’s features are genuinely outstanding. The color photographs are one, the best of the five major works under review. So are the outlines of Biblical books, although these outlines are a bit conventional in organization, lacking the imagination found in both the Dictionary of Bible and Religion and Harper’s Bible Dictionary. The general articles on flora and fauna are truly splendid in NIBD—with the materials well portrayed and arranged. Regrettably, the dictionary does not include the Hebrew and Greek terms. Its articles are on the whole up-to-date, though one finds no article on Ebla, and the treatment of Gnosticism, for example, is rather sketchy. In general, the dictionary is not completely successful in placing the Biblical subjects fully in their social context in the ancient Near East. But NIBD is a rich resource that includes articles on theological doctrines and teachings prominent in the evangelical Christian world.

Scholarship: 4

Clarity: 4

Maps: 5

Illustrations: 5

Production: 4

New Bible Dictionary, 2nd Edition (NBD)

J. D. Douglas and N. Hillyer

(Inter-Varsity and Tyndale House, 1962, 1982) 1,324 pp., no plates.

The New Bible Dictionary is the most detailed and comprehensive of the recent one-volume dictionaries of the familiar sort. It is a bit longer and more inclusive than Harper’s Bible Dictionary or Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary, partly because it includes more articles (and longer ones) on doctrinal and theological subjects, and partly because it has such good and lengthy general articles that organize complex subjects under a single heading, thereby repeating some information given elsewhere.

The NBD is distinctive in another way. The editors and contributors frankly identify themselves as committed to the literal truth of the Bible and intend that the dictionary reflect that commitment. The articles are signed, for the most part, and in large measure they reflect the fruits of critical Biblical scholarship, despite the undoubted determination of the contributors to treat the Biblical record as true in all its parts and with regard to all its subjects.

NBD has excellent articles on flora and fauna, and the Hebrew and Greek names are always given. Its articles on jewelry and on musical instruments are also thorough and fine. The treatment of theological doctrines is always lucid and thorough, not simply claiming the positions presented to be true but seeking to show how they develop out of Biblical text and teachings.

No collection of maps appears in a single place. There are maps interspersed, along with many line drawings, charts and tables. And a splendid index to the maps is found, with references to the Illustrated Bible Dictionary (1980), published by the Inter-Varsity Press, which apparently is intended to supply the need for a more fully illustrated dictionary of the Bible.

The format of NBD is not as attractive as the other major dictionaries discussed here. There is too much copy per column for the eye to take in easily. The work is very well outlined, but the crowded type is distracting. The paper and binding are excellent, and the type, though small, is not actually hard to read.

The NBD uses the Revised Standard Version as its basic translation of the Bible, though it refers to other versions as needed. Considerable revision has taken place in this second edition. There is a brief, cautious, but good article on Ebla in the second edition. Gnosticism is reviewed thoroughly, with many references to the New Testament and with an excellent bibliography. The bibliographies to the major articles are, in general, the best to be found in the five dictionaries under review.

The revision has been made without seams. There is no evidence, moreover, of the new material tucked in by the editors as they revised the dictionary.

Scholarship: 4

Clarity: 4

Maps: 3

Illustrations: 2

Production: 3

060

New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible (NWDB)

Henry Snyder Gehman, text editor, Robert B. Wright, illustrations editor

(Westminster, 1970) 1,027 pp., 16 plates.

The New Westminster Dictionary is no longer new. Published in 1970, it is a prodigious achievement, done almost entirely by the late Henry S. Gehman of Princeton Theological Seminary. Now 16 years old, the dictionary is showing its age. It is included for review here because it conforms well with the large one-volume dictionary type that is the chief subject of this review and because it has served so well for these many years. It also aims at the same kind of comprehensiveness found in the other four major dictionaries.

The strength of the New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible lies in its precise treatments of the issues covered. Gehman struggled to make clear the subjects treated, to clear up misunderstandings, to improve readers’ comprehension of the Bible. His work has gaps not found in the other four dictionaries: The Apocrypha are all covered in a single, rather sketchy article. The Pseudepigrapha are even less well covered. There are no general articles on flora and fauna or jewels. There is no serious treatment of certain theological terms and themes, such as justification, sanctification, etc. The author is content to specify the Greek and Hebrew terms and to offer brief definitions of the terms. But occasionally, Gehman gives long and detailed presentations on Biblical personalities or theological realities. His articles on Moses, Jesus and God are models of lucidity and comprehensive summation of Biblical evidence. His article on the Gospels includes a detailed harmony of the Gospels that is particularly attractive in format and in content.

This work by a single scholar, apart from the fine illustrations provided by Robert B. Wright, is a marvelous tribute to the author’s learning. Few are the scholars today who would undertake to write a Bible dictionary single-handed. The work makes use of the Westminster Historical Atlas maps, with their index. The King James Version provides the basic translation for NWDB, though many of the RSV readings are also included.

Scholarship: 4

Clarity: 4

Maps: 4

Illustrations: 4

Production: 4

Briefer Dictionaries

Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary (ZPBD)

Merrill C. Tenney, editor

(Zondervan, 1963, 1964, 1967) 916 pp., 16 plates.

The Zondervan dictionary first appeared in 1963 and was re-issued with apparently minor revisions in 1964 and 1967. It is intended for pastors, Sunday school teachers, Bible class leaders and as a handy reference work for Biblical scholars.

Longer and more comprehensive than the other two works discussed below, the Zondervan dictionary is also a more scholarly work. It is written from a theologically conservative viewpoint, but the editor has not sought to make all of the individual articles, most of which are signed, conform to some conservative standard. The work does include articles on doctrines and theological terms as well as on the Biblical personalities, locales and terms. The aim is to offer guidance for evangelical Protestants on most of the questions that are likely to be raised by Bible studies.

Another mark of the scholarly efforts of authors and editor is the provision of Hebrew and Greek terms for the items under discussion. Many photographs in black and white are included, plus a few line drawings. Printing, binding and map quality are excellent.

Scholarship: 4

Clarity: 4

Maps: 5

Illustrations: 4

Production: 4

Today’s Dictionary of the Bible (TDB)

T.A. Bryant, editor

(Bethany House, 1982) 678 pp., 14 plates.

Published especially for families, students of Bible colleges, Sunday school teachers and Christian workers, this dictionary offers quite brief explanations and identifications of Biblical personalities, terms, books, places and doctrines. Personal names are given etymological explanations, often, of course, quite dubious. There are 14 plates of maps and a fair number of illustrations, especially of flora and fauna. Biblical doctrines and the interpretation of the origin of the Bible and of Biblical books are in line with evangelical Christian doctrine.

The book is produced in such a way as to keep the cost down—a worthy undertaking, though the result shows in the poor quality of the art work and the paper.

An article on the Ecumenical Movement (p. 195) includes the assertion that this movement has been “a cause for theological division.” It is difficult to account for the inclusion of such a statement in a Bible dictionary, whatever the (dubious) merits of the assertion itself.

Scholarship: 1

Clarity: 4

Maps: 3

Illustrations: 2

Production: 3

061

Young’s Bible Dictionary (YBD)

G. Douglas Young and George Giacumakis, Jr., editors

(Tyndale House, 1984) 640 pp., 1 map.

This handbook was produced for the use of evangelical lay persons. Completed in Israel by G. Douglas Young, the founder and former director of the Institute of Holy Land Studies, and by his successor, George Giacumakis, Jr., the book’s best features are its treatment of flora and fauna, trade routes and archaeological discoveries. Place identifications are also well done. The book has a single large map included, unattached, and has no illustrations at all.

It is regrettable that the numerous misspellings, stylistic infelicities and other instances of lack of editorial care should mar this otherwise useful volume.

Scholarship: 4

Clarity: 4

Maps: Only 1

Illustrations: N/A

Production: 3

It is interesting to note that conservative Christians frequently give large place to the findings of archaeology as confirming the truth of the Bible, though many conservatives also insist that the Bible cannot be proved by findings external to it. Critical Biblical scholarship has also given prominence to such findings, while also insisting that archaeological findings illuminate the Biblical record but do not establish it. Everything depends on what is made of the materials unearthed by archaeologists; factual materials require understanding and interpretation. In the Bible dictionaries reviewed above, there are levels of sophistication in the use of archaeological findings, but none of the works is entirely uncritical in using these materials. Some (New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible and Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary) are a bit too ready to claim support for the Bible’s accuracy from the side of archaeology. Others—conservative and liberal—are very careful not to do so (New Bible Dictionary and Harper’s Bible Dictionary).

This review of Bible dictionaries concludes with an instructive finding. The work of “critical Biblical scholars and the work of “evangelical” or “conservative” Biblical scholars readily stand in comparison with one another. Clearly, religious views can get in the way of Biblical scholarship, but they do not necessarily do so. Also, clearly, scholarship bent upon “objective” presentation of findings, without any reference to a given religious position, can produce tendentious writing that offends religious sensibilities, but there is no need for such a development. The scholarly works reviewed above rarely fall into either trap. They do not usually bend the evidence, either to support a religious position or to lean over backward to escape the influences of a religious position. It is evident that international Biblical scholarship is not only flourishing today; it is also flourishing in a scholarly community marked by a good spirit.

Since the 1960s Bible dictionaries have been appearing in record numbers. In 1985 the Society of Biblical Literature joined with Harper & Row in the production of one of the handsomest. The venture itself was noteworthy: A scholarly society worked out terms with a commercial publisher to share the production and the proceeds of a scholarly work, the entire contents of which the society and its members contracted to provide. This year, one of the world’s largest producers of Bibles, Thomas Nelson Publishers, put together a very attractive and comprehensive Bible dictionary, the product of the labors of […]