Open Bible Data Home About News OET Key
OET OET-RV OET-LV ULT UST BSB BLB AICNT OEB WEBBE WMBB NET LSV FBV TCNT T4T LEB BBE Moff JPS Wymth ASV DRA YLT Drby RV Wbstr KJB-1769 KJB-1611 Bshps Gnva Cvdl TNT Wycl SR-GNT UHB BrLXX BrTr Related Topics Parallel Interlinear Reference Dictionary Search
MainId: 000677000000000
Version: 0
HasAramaic: False
InLXX: True
AlphaPos: α
StrongCodes: G0684
BaseForms:
BaseFormID: 000677001000000
PartsOfSpeech: noun, f.
Inflections:
Lemma: ἀπώλεια
BaseFormIndex: 1
Realizations: -ας
RelatedLemmas: {'Word': 'ὀλοθρεύω', 'Meanings': []}
LEXMeanings:
LEXID: 000677001001000
LEXIsBiblicalTerm: M
LEXEntryCode: 20.31
LEXIndent: 0
LEXDomains: Violence, Harm, Destroy, Kill
LEXSubDomains: Destroy
LEXSenses:
LanguageCode: en
LastEdited: 2021-08-16 15:35:36
DefinitionShort: act of destroying or causing the destruction of persons, objects, or institutions
Glosses: destruction
Comments: In a number of languages it is difficult to find a general term for ‘destruction.’ What has often happened is the extension of meaning from a more specific type of reference, for example, ‘to smash,’ to a more generic meaning of ‘to destroy,’ and whether one understands the specific or more generic meaning depends largely upon the context. Accordingly, in {S:04400800300006} one may find a figurative usage of a term meaning ‘to smash’ (though understood in a more generic sense), for example, ‘Saul then worked in order to smash the church.’
LEXReferences: MAT 7:13, YHN 17:12, ACTs 8:20, ROM 9:22, PHP 1:28, PHP 3:19, 2TH 2:3, 1TIM 6:9, HEB 10:39, 2PET 2:1, 2PET 2:1, 2PET 2:3, 2PET 3:7, 2PET 3:16, REV 17:8, REV 17:11
LEXID: 000677001002000
LEXIsBiblicalTerm: M
LEXEntryCode: 65.14
LEXIndent: 0
LEXDomains: Value
LEXSubDomains: Valuable, Lacking in Value
LEXSenses:
LanguageCode: en
LastEdited: 2021-08-16 15:35:36
DefinitionShort: an action demonstrating complete disregard for the value of something
Glosses: ['waste', 'ruin']
Comments: In the context of {S:04101400400020} the understanding of ἀπώλεια in the literal sense of ‘destruction’ (see {D:20.31}) does not seem to be adequate. The following verse concerning the three hundred denarii would seem to indicate that it was disregard for the value of something rather than destroying the perfume. In fact, the use of the perfume would not have been a matter of destroying. Accordingly, an equivalent of ‘waste’ seems to be far more satisfactory. In some languages the equivalent of this question in {S:04101400400020} is ‘why did she not think about the value of the perfume?’