Vocabulary Range of the Greek of the New Testament Books

As a way of determining the vocabulary range of the Greek of the New Testament books, I ran searches on each book calculating the total number of words in the book and the number of unique roots. It is an easy task using Accordance (as I am for this exercise) or Logos Bible software. I typed the results into Excel and could then calculate a percentage of unique word roots per total words in each book.

The results can only be approximate, of course, because they are highly dependent on the number of words in the selection. For example, a 5-word sentence is likely to have 5 unique words and thus be a 100% ratio. I.e., the longer the document, the lower the ratio one should expect since commonly used words (articles, conjunctions, names, etc.) are going to be used more frequently and thus dilute the uniqueness of words overall. E.g., in the whole NT of Nestle Aland 28, there are 138069 words with 5432 unique roots and a uniqueness ratio of 3.93%. For 3 John, the shortest document, there are 221 words with 112 unique roots and a uniqueness ratio of 50.68%. The table confirms this expected result. Still, despite the length factor, there are some clear and interesting results which are both predictable and surprising.

SORTED BY BOOK LENGTH
	Total Words	Unique Roots	Unique Roots / Total Words
LUKE	19483	2043	10.49%
ACTS	18451	2028	10.99%
MAT	18348	1681	9.16%
JOHN	15633	1016	6.50%
MAR	11305	1340	11.85%
REV	9853	912	9.26%
ROM	7113	1058	14.87%
1COR	6832	958	14.02%
HEB	4955	1029	20.77%
2COR	4480	785	17.52%
EPH	2424	529	21.82%
GAL	2232	521	23.34%
1JOH	2143	236	11.01%
JMS	1747	555	31.77%
1PET	1682	546	32.46%
PHIL	1631	441	27.04%
1TIM	1594	537	33.69%
COL	1583	433	27.35%
1THES	1484	364	24.53%
2TIM	1241	454	36.58%
2PET	1102	396	35.93%
2THES	826	250	30.27%
TIT	661	298	45.08%
JUDE	460	228	49.57%
PHLM	337	140	41.54%
2JOH	248	98	39.52%
3JOH	221	112	50.68%

 EXPECTED RESULTS

• As one might guess, the Johannine literature with it spirals of dialogues and community-shaped language has the lowest ratio of unique roots. The Gospel of John is particularly striking in relation to the other three gospels for having such a lower percentage. Unsurprisingly, 1 John has an extremely low ratio compared to its peers in size like Ephesians and Galatians.
• It is also perhaps expected that Revelation is a bit lower than expected.
• As one might also expect, Luke has the highest ratio among the gospels.

SOMEWHAT UNEXPECTED RESULTS

• What may come as a surprise, however, is the somewhat higher than expected ratio of unique words in Mark
• More striking, though, at least to me, is the lower than expected ratio in Matthew. It may be, however, that Matthew’s ratio is average in relation to its number of words, and in that case, it makes Luke’s ratio all the more remarkable for being so high.
• Given the wider range of topics and incidents, I was expecting the ratio for Acts to be higher than Luke, but that they are so similar might be taken as confirmation that the same author wrote both.

How else might this data be used?

THE ENDING OF MARK

There have been many arguments regarding the ending of the gospel of Mark.

		Total Words	Unique Roots	Unique Roots / Total Words
1	Mark1.1-16.20	11305	1340	11.85%
2	Mark1.1-16.8	11132	1323	11.88%
3	Mark16.9-20	171	99	57.89%
4	Mark3.9-20	167	81	48.50%

What do these results show?

• Comparing Mark 1.1.1-16.20 (row 1) and omitting 16.9-20 (row 2) does show that the ratio goes up a bit even though the number of words has increased. This only confirms which many others have already noted that the vocabulary of 16.9-20 is not fully consistent with the rest of the gospel.
• Just looking at Mark 16.9-20 (row 3) on its own, the ratio is only slightly higher than what might be expected for a selection of that length. I did look at a random range elsewhere in Mark of similar length (Mark 3.9-20, row 4), and the difference is significant.
• I.e., though certainly not proof, these results suggest different authorship of 16.9-20 from the rest of the gospel.

PAULINE AND DEUTERO-PAULINE LETTERS

There have been many arguments regarding which letters are authentically Paul’s and which are disputed (highlighted in blue in the table).

	Total Words	Unique Roots	Unique Roots / Total Words
ROM	7113	1058	14.87%
1COR	6832	958	14.02%
2COR	4480	785	17.52%
EPH	2424	529	21.82%
GAL	2232	521	23.34%
PHIL	1631	441	27.04%
1TIM	1594	537	33.69%
COL	1583	433	27.35%
1THES	1484	364	24.53%
2TIM	1241	454	36.58%
2THES	826	250	30.27%
TITUS	661	298	45.08%
PHLM	337	140	41.54%

What do these results show? 

• If the disputed letters are removed from the table, the ratios are expected and consistent in relation to the total number of words.
• The main outliers are 1 and 2 Timothy which have a significantly higher ratio than expected. I.e., though certainly not proof, these results suggest different authorship of 1 and 2 Timothy from the genuine Pauline letters.
• Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians are in the expected range of unique roots, so that cannot be used as an argument against their authentic Pauline  

Anyone else see anything in these results?

Matthew 20.1-16 Translations and Notes - RCL Year A Lectionary 25/ 17th Sunday After Pentecost

Image generated by DALL-E with prompt "a 3D rendering of migrant workers and a boss in a grape vineyard"

Matthew 20.1-16 is the RCL Year A assigned reading for Lectionary 25/ 17th Sunday After Pentecost. It's the parable usually called "Laborers in the Vineyard." When I teach this parable, I label as "All in a Day's Wage" or "The Line Forms at the Rear."

It's a well-told story, and I try to capture more of the conversational tone in my translation. (Cf. link below.) I think that one of the challenges of the parable for modern hearers is that we want fairness, not equality. This parable is closer to Marx's "From each according to ability, to each according to need." It also is a dramatization of the Lord's Prayer petition, "Give us today our daily bread." 

One more thing... The closing to the parable is the well-known, "So the last will be first, and the first will be last." I suspect that most people picture this as a vertical / hierarchical kind of reversal. I think that's problematic, because it means there will be an endless cycle of reversals. Think instead of a vertical / hierarchical order being changed into a horizontal equality. I.e., it really means that the first will be the same as the last and the last the same as the first. That's what I think God's dominion looks like.

Here's the link to the downloadable file. My translation is on the last 2 pages.

• Matthew 20.1-16 translations and notes and MGVH translation

Matthew 16.21-28 Translations and Notes - RCL Year A Lectionary 22/ 14th Sunday After Pentecost

Image generated by DALL-E 2 with prompt: "Depict someone standing behind Jesus in the style of Georgia O'Keefe"

Matthew 16.21-28 is the RCL Year A assigned reading for Lectionary 22/ 14th Sunday After Pentecost. It's a shame that the RCL splits up 16.13-28 over two Sundays, since vv13-20 are needed to appreciate what happens in vv21-28. (Cf. page 10 of my downloadable PDF below for a way to introduce the text and set the context.)

Matthew makes some interesting changes to his source in Mark 8.27-9.1, but where Peter's status had been elevated in Matthew 16.16-19, Matthew does preserve Jesus rebuke to him in 16.23: "Get behind me, you satan!" The Son of Man / Child of Humanity has more status (his angels, not the Father's angels) in 16.27, and Matthew also adds a typical Matthean concern about the judgment of peoples' actions.

Here is a PDF you can download with translations, notes, and introduction

• Matthew 16.21-28 mgvh translation and notes

A couple other resources I recommend checking:

• WorkingPreacher 
• GoTell 

Walk in Paul's Steps from Corinth to Cenchreae

View looking west to Acrocorinth; Examilia quarry in foreground

I spent 3 week in Corinth in June participating in the Lechaion Harbor and Settlement Project directed by Paul Scotton. I had a wonderful time! On the weekends, I went around and tried to retrace Paul's paths in Greece. I had already done most of his path on the Via Engatia from Neapolis (Kavala) to Philippi in 2017. This summer I visited where Paul went from Pella to Edessa to Beroea (Veria) and from there on to Pydna via Aigai (Vergina). I also stopped at Nicopolis (Titus 3.12). Working at Lechaion, I went back and forth between the harbor and the Roman forum. I suspect Paul also did so, especially if on his third trip he went all the way west to Illyricum (Romans 15.19) and then sailed south and then east in the Gulf of Corinth to Lechaion. I will share reports on those when I get a chance, but for this post, I will report on my walk from Corinth to Cenchreae (Kenchreai) and back. We are told Paul sailed from the Cenchreae on his way back to Jerusalem and Antioch at the end of his second journey.

Acts 18.18: After staying there for a considerable time, Paul said farewell to the believers and sailed for Syria, accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila. At Cenchreae he had his hair cut, for he was under a vow.

If you are interested in walking this path, I share suggested routes (with Google Maps guides), hiking shortcuts, and some tips for things along the way. It is about 7.3 miles (11.5km) one way and takes about 3 hours at a leisurely pace. The recommendation for a walking stick to fend off dogs came from Hannah Lents who will be presenting at SBL this year: "The Road to Kenchreai: A History of a Gospel Highway."

Looking east to Cenchreae and the Saronic Gulf

Here is the PDF with all the information. Let us know if you have walked this path and what your experience was!

• Corinth to Cenchreae (Kenchreai) Walking Path
  

Gardens of the Roman Empire

Here's a new site I just came across (HT: DCCommentaries on Twitter/X): Gardens of the Roman Empire. From the site description:

The peoples of the Roman Empire conducted their lives outdoors in gardens, parks, groves, tomb gardens and other designed environments. Whether created by highly skilled topiarii such as the freedman Tiberius Claudius Turiscus in Rome, by an anonymous team of gardeners and trainees at a tomb in Andematunum, Germania, or by a shopkeeper in Pompeii, gardens have left material traces discoverable from archaeological digs, in literature, paintings, inscriptions, or coins.

We present this evidence for the garden culture of the Roman Empire in a searchable encyclopedic format. Scholars, students, and the interested public internationally can explore a wide array of topics to address contemporary questions about imperial power, daily life, the environment, garden art, and religion across the diverse cultures of the Roman world.

We are launching the GRE website in a beta format. As a legacy project, our goal is to share the original text prepared by Wilhelmina Jashemski and her editorial team, and develop this site in collaboration with our readers. 

There are many gardens located in Greece, as one would expect, but surprisingly, lots in England and few in Italy. The map is interactive and can go full screen and makes beautiful implementation of OpenStreetMap.Clicking on a site will bring up a separate page of information that is quite complete and very well done.

Of biblical interest, there were Herodian gardens at Machaerus, three gardens at Herodium, five at Herodian Jericho (Kypros), Masada, Ein Gedi, and two at Caesarea Maritima. (For now, Machaerus is mislocated near Jericho. I've reported it.) There are also sites in Greece where Paul travelled.

Check it out and click away!

Matthew 13.1-23 Translations and Notes - RCL Year A Lectionary 15 / 7th Sunday After Pentecost

Image available under a CC-BY license from OpenBible.Info

Matthew 13.1-23 is the RCL Year A assigned reading for Lectionary 15 / 7th Sunday After Pentecost. Actually, it's only vv1-9 and 18-23. This is such a disservice to the text, since vv10-17 are the critical center explaining what's going on. Preacher, I recommend you read all of vv1-23 and shorten your sermon if you have to. 

Attached here is my translation of the text. There is a lot going on in the Greek that escapes notice in the English, so after my translation I have included some notes. 

Tldr: I hope no one preaches a sermon encouraging people to be “good soil.” (How is that even possible? I can only picture dumping manure on the soil to enrich it! Can a person choose what soil to be?) The people are the plants, and Matthew’s version of this parable both accounts for the rejection of Jesus’ message and the encouragement to be and the promise of being extravagantly productive followers of Jesus.

My translation and notes: Matthew 13.1-23 mgvh notes