Greek and Hebrew review: where the lexical claims stand¶
This appendix reviews the linguistic claims the casebook makes, and grades them. It exists because a project that accuses Calvinists of reading a system into the text must not read its own system into a lexicon.
The rule: a lexicon gives a word's range; the context selects the sense. No word study, by itself, settles a theological argument. Where the casebook's argument depends on context rather than lexis, this appendix says so.
Summary table¶
| Text | The claim | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| John 6:44 | Helkō does not mean "compel"; the operative clause is "can come." | Strong on syntax; the lexical claim is overstated if it says helkō can never mean compel. |
| John 12:32 | The same verb draws "all people." | Strong. The consistency argument is the strongest lexical point in the file. |
| Acts 13:48 | Tetagmenoi may be middle ("disposed themselves"). | Possible, not certain. The contextual argument is stronger than the grammatical one. |
| Rom 8:29; 1 Pet 1:2 | Proegnō means "foreknew," not "foreloved." | The ordinary sense is foreknowledge; "forelove" is a theological extension. The inference to foreseen faith is contextual, not lexical. |
| Rom 9:22-23 | Katērtismena (passive, no agent) vs. proētoimasen (active, God). | Suggestive, not decisive. Some read the passive as a divine passive. |
| Phil 1:29 | Charizomai means "graciously grant," not "infuse." | Strong on the word; the verse does not specify a mechanism. |
| 1 Tim 2:4 | Pas is unqualified. | Strong. The "all kinds" reading is contextual, not lexical. |
| Eph 2:1 | Nekros ("dead") is a metaphor for alienation. | Strong. The lexeme does not carry "cannot respond." |
| Exod 9:16 | Heʿemadti means "caused to stand / preserved." | Strong. "Raised up" is a defensible dynamic rendering but can mislead. |
| Acts 16:14 | Dianoigō is perceptual enablement. | Strong. The verb is used of eyes, minds, and hearts. |
| Acts 18:10 | Laos is covenant-people language. | Strong. The word is not "elect." |
| Rev 13:8 | "From the foundation of the world" may modify "written" or "slain." | Genuinely ambiguous. The parallel in 17:8 favors "written." |
1. Helkō (John 6:44; 12:32)¶
Data. Helkō occurs in the New Testament in John 6:44; 12:32; 18:10 (drawing a sword); 21:6, 11 (dragging a net); Acts 16:19 and 21:30 (dragging people); James 2:6 (dragging the poor into court). In the LXX it renders Hebrew mashak and is used of drawing a bow, drawing water, and drawing a person.
Lexical range. BDAG's entry gives the sense "draw, attract" (and, in the passive/figurative, "be drawn, be attracted"). The word can denote physical force (dragging a net), but it also denotes attraction. The Greek of Hosea 11:4 uses the verb of God drawing his people with cords of kindness and bands of love, and Jeremiah 31:3 speaks of God drawing his people with everlasting love. Those are paraphrases of the sense, not verbatim quotations of a translation.
Assessment. The claim "the word means to drag, therefore the drawing is irresistible" is the totality-transfer fallacy: it takes one end of the range and installs it as the meaning. The counter-claim "helkō never means compel" is equally overstated; John 21:6, 11 and Acts 21:30 show that force is within range.
The casebook's real argument is not lexical but syntactical: the sentence's main clause is "no one can come," and v.45 glosses the drawing as teaching. That argument stands on its own. The file should say: whatever the force of the verb, the sentence does not assert that everyone drawn comes. That is the strong form.
Verdict: revise any sentence that says "the Greek means 'attract,' not 'drag.'" Say instead: "the word's range includes attraction and compulsion; the context selects teaching (v.45), and the syntax asserts ability, not inevitable arrival."
2. Tassō and tetagmenoi (Acts 13:48)¶
Data. The form tetagmenoi is a perfect participle; in the middle and passive voices the forms are identical. The active verb means "arrange, station, appoint, ordain." The middle can mean "arrange oneself, take one's place, set oneself." Compare 1 Cor 16:15: etaxan heautous — "they devoted themselves" (literally "they appointed themselves") to the ministry of the saints.
Lexical sources. Thayer lists, among the senses, "to appoint on one's own responsibility or authority" (middle). The Expositor's Greek Testament (Knowling) notes that some take the word as middle ("as many as had set themselves unto eternal life") and cites Rendall and Blass, but Knowling himself prefers the passive and reads it as God's appointment. Ellicott's commentary renders "as many as were disposed for." Meyer's commentary takes the passive but insists the divine ordering was "in accordance with His prognōsis," and calls the decretum absolutum reading "dogmatic arbitrariness."
Assessment. The middle-voice reading is grammatically possible, not grammatically required. The casebook's strongest argument is contextual: (a) the text names no agent and no time; (b) v.46 immediately supplies a parallel of self-judgment ("judge yourselves unworthy"); (c) tassō has a broad range that includes "dispose/arrange." The middle-voice claim should be presented as "possible" and "consistent with the context," not as "what the Greek means."
Verdict: keep the argument, soften the grammar. "The participle can be read as middle" is defensible; "the participle is middle" is not.
3. Proegnō / prognōsis (Rom 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet 1:2, 20)¶
Data. Proginōskō means "know beforehand." It is used of God's foreknowledge (Rom 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet 1:2), of human prior knowledge (Acts 26:5; 2 Pet 3:17), and of Christ's foreknowledge (1 Pet 1:20). The noun prognōsis occurs in Acts 2:23 and 1 Pet 1:2.
The "forelove" claim. Some Reformed exegetes argue that "know" in Hebrew thought (yadaʿ) is relational, so "foreknew" means "set his love on beforehand" (cf. Amos 3:2, "you only have I known"). This is a genuine theological reading, and it has lexical support in the Hebrew background. But in Greek, proginōskō is a compound of ginōskō with pro-, and its ordinary sense is "know beforehand." The relational nuance must be argued from context, not assumed from the word.
Assessment. The casebook is on firm ground when it says the ordinary sense is foreknowledge and that Rom 11:2 uses it of a people known beforehand. It is on weaker ground if it says the word cannot mean "forelove." And the inference "foreknowledge implies foreseen faith" is a theological argument, not a lexical one: God could foreknow his own purpose to give faith.
Verdict: present "foreknowledge" as the ordinary sense and the context as the support; do not claim the lexicon settles the doctrine.
4. Proōrisen (Rom 8:29-30; Eph 1:5, 11; Acts 4:28; 1 Cor 2:7)¶
Data. Proorizō means "predestine, determine beforehand." It occurs six times in the New Testament, always of God's action, and always in contexts of God's redemptive purpose in Christ.
Assessment. The word does teach predestination. The dispute is not whether God predestines, but what he predestines (a people to conformity to Christ, adoption, an inheritance) and on what basis. The casebook should not minimize the word; it should locate it in the corporate, Christ-centered contexts in which it appears.
Verdict: strong; but the argument must be about the object and basis of predestination, not the existence of it.
5. Katērtismena vs. proētoimasen (Rom 9:22-23)¶
Data. "Vessels of wrath katērtismena (prepared/fitted) for destruction" — a perfect passive participle with no stated agent. "Vessels of mercy, which proētoimasen (he prepared beforehand) for glory" — an aorist active verb with God as the subject.
Assessment. The asymmetry is real and underappreciated. Paul could have written "which God prepared for destruction"; he did not. But Greek often uses a "divine passive" without naming God, and a reader may supply the agent from context. The argument is about Paul's reticence, not a grammatical proof.
Verdict: strong as a rhetorical observation; not decisive as a grammatical one. Say "Paul does not name the agent" rather than "the text says no one prepared them."
6. Charizomai (Phil 1:29)¶
Data. Charizomai means "give freely, grant as a favor, forgive." It is used in Phil 1:29 of believing and suffering, in Phil 2:9 of the name given to Christ, in Rom 8:32 of God giving the Son, and in 1 Cor 2:12 of the gifts given by the Spirit.
Assessment. The word establishes that faith is a gift, in the sense of a gracious grant. It does not specify the mechanism (infusion, enablement, opportunity), and the same verb governs suffering in the same verse — which no one thinks is irresistibly infused.
Verdict: strong on "gift," silent on "irresistible."
7. Pas and kosmos¶
Data. Pas ("all, every, whole") can be distributive or collective, and context decides. Kosmos ("world") has a wide range in John: the created order (1:10), the earth (13:1), humanity (3:16), the unbelieving system (7:7; 15:18), the Gentiles (12:19).
Assessment. Neither word is a code. The casebook's argument is that in the disputed salvation texts there is no contextual signal of restriction, while the Reformed reading supplies one from the system. That is a contextual argument, and it is strong. It is not a lexical proof.
Verdict: strong; keep the emphasis on context and on the arbitrariness of restricting "all" only where the system needs it.
8. Heʿemadti (Exod 9:16, quoted in Rom 9:17)¶
Data. The Hebrew is the hiphil of ʿamad ("stand"): "I caused you to stand" — i.e., I preserved you, sustained you, kept you in place. The LXX renders diētērēthēs ("you were kept/preserved"). The common English "I raised you up" (ESV, KJV) is a dynamic rendering that can suggest "I brought you into existence" or "I appointed you," which the Hebrew does not require.
Assessment. "Preserved/put on display" is lexically precise; "raised up" is defensible but ambiguous. The argument that Pharaoh was sustained for a purpose — not created for reprobation — is supported.
Verdict: strong; note the translation issue and avoid overclaiming.
9. Dianoigō (Luke 24:31, 32, 45; Acts 16:14)¶
Data. "Open" — used of eyes (Luke 24:31), Scriptures (24:32), the mind (24:45), and the heart (Acts 16:14). In each case the opening enables perception or understanding.
Assessment. The verb is perceptual, not coercive. The casebook's reading of Acts 16:14 is well grounded.
Verdict: strong.
10. Laos (Acts 18:10)¶
Data. Laos means "people," and in Luke-Acts it is especially the covenant people of God (Luke 1:68; 2:32; Acts 3:23; 4:27; 13:17). It is not eklektos ("elect") or eklogē ("election").
Assessment. The word supports the corporate/covenant reading. It does not prove that the "many people" are merely future converts, but it shows that the verse is not using election vocabulary.
Verdict: strong.
11. Revelation 13:8 — the syntax¶
Data. ...hou ou gegraptai to onoma autou en tō bibliō tēs zōēs tou arniou tou esphagmenou apo katabolēs kosmou. The phrase apo katabolēs kosmou can modify gegraptai ("written") or esphagmenou ("slain").
Assessment. Both are grammatically possible. The parallel in Rev 17:8 (hōn ou gegraptai to onoma... apo katabolēs kosmou) has only "written" to modify, which favors the "written" reading; the ESV, NASB, CSB, and RSV take it that way, while the KJV and NIV take it with "slain." The casebook should present the ambiguity and argue that neither reading yields a proof of unconditional reprobation.
Verdict: the ambiguity is real; do not claim the Greek settles it.
12. Nekros (Eph 2:1)¶
Data. Nekros means "dead." In the New Testament it is used literally (of corpses) and figuratively (of spiritual death, Luke 15:24, 32; Rom 6:11; Eph 2:1; Col 2:13; 1 Tim 5:6; Rev 3:1).
Assessment. The lexeme does not carry "incapable of hearing or responding." The metaphor's force comes from the context, and the same Paul addresses the "dead" with "Awake, O sleeper... arise from the dead" (Eph 5:14).
Verdict: strong.
Where the casebook must be careful¶
These are the places where earlier drafts overreached. The current files have been tightened along these lines; the list is kept as a standing check for editors.
- Acts 13:48 — do not say the participle is middle. Say it can be read as middle, and that the context (v.46) and the absence of an agent carry the argument.
- John 6:44 — do not say helkō means "attract, not drag." Say the range includes both, and that the syntax and v.45 decide the sense.
- Romans 8:29 — do not say the Greek means "foreseen faith." Say the ordinary sense is foreknowledge, and the theological inference is that election is according to it.
- Romans 9:22 — do not say the passive proves God is not the agent. Say Paul does not name the agent, in contrast to the active verb for the vessels of mercy.
- Revelation 13:8 — do not say the phrase modifies "written" as if it were certain. Present the ambiguity and the 17:8 parallel.
- Exodus 9:16 / Romans 9:17 — do not rest an argument on "raised up" meaning "preserved" without noting the translation debate.
None of these corrections damages the casebook's overall argument. They make it harder to dismiss, because they concede what the evidence does not support.
Sources¶
- BDAG, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (2000).
- Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (1889).
- Liddell-Scott-Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed.
- W. Bauer, F. W. Danker, et al. — the standard.
- A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (1914).
- Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (1996) — especially on the middle voice, the divine passive, and the articular infinitive.
- F. Blass and A. Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament (BDF), rev. R. W. Funk.
- J. H. Moulton, W. F. Howard, and N. Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek.
- HALOT and BDB for Hebrew; P. Joüon and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew.
- R. J. Knowling, The Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. 2, on Acts 13:48.
- H. A. W. Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, on 13:48.
- C. J. Ellicott, Commentary for English Readers, on Acts 13:48.