A Word Study On

BOU/LOMAI

 

 

Graduate Assignment

for the 3-hour Course

in

Greek Exegesis: Romans 9-11

 

 

Instructor: Dr. S. Lewis Johnson

 

 

 

 

 

by

Hal Harless

3706 Lofland Lane

Rowlett, Texas 75088

(972)475-7939

 

 

September 1997

I. Introduction and Purpose

This word study will analyze the verb bou,lomai and its noun forms bou,lhma, boulh, and bou,lhsij. Consideration will be given to Classical, Septuagint, and New Testament Koine’ usage. Following this analysis, I will draw some conclusions as to the lingusitic and theological implications of this study.

II. Classical Greek Usage of bou,lomai

Liddell and Scott define bou,lomai simply as, "to will, wish, be willing. . ." This would appear at first glance to allow for a broad continuum in meaning. However, the noun bou,lhma is defined by Liddell and Scott as:

. . .will, determination, Lat. consilium: -- a project, plan, intention. 2. counsel, advice, whether taken or given. II. also like Lat. concilium, the Council or Senate, esp. that of the 500 at Athens.

Thus bou,lhma is more of a determination than a desire. The noun bou,lhsij is also defined by Liddell and Scott as, "a willing: will, purpose." This is in keeping with the idea that bou,lomai is more a volitional choice than an emotional feeling.

Müller agrees that:

The noun boulê, similarly Hom. onwards, derived from boulomai, denotes an intention, a deliberation. It also stands for the result of a deliberation in the sense of a decision of the will, a resolution, a counsel or an edict. So already in Homer (Il. 2, 53) an assembly of men is called a boulê, when it became an institutional body (e.g. the Council of the Five Hundred in Athens, Hdt. 5, 72; 9, 5).

A later derivation is boulêma (Aristotle onwards), describing the will more as a purpose, an intention, a tendency (Plato, Leg. 6, 769d; Isoc., 3, 15, Aristotle Eth. Nic. 2, 1).

However, while agreeing as to the Classical usage, Müller notes that bou,lomai was even in Classical times beginning to be used interchangeably with evqe,lw:

. . .attested from Homer onwards, meant originally to prefer, to favour (Il. 1, 117), then to want, to have in view (Il. 1, 79), to elect, to be determined to (Eur., Iph. Taur. 61), to decide (Demetrius 2, 20; 19, 23). It is suggested that boulomai was originally more the willing which arises out of conscious consideration free from emotion, an endeavor, by contrast with the more emotionally stressed willing rendered by ethelõ. Thus, Il. 1, 112: I did not wish (ouk ethelon) to accept any substitute, for I intend (boulomai) to have her at home with me; and Plato, Georg. 522c: if you want (ei de boulei) . . . I am ready (ethelõ). But boulomai and ethelõ were soon used synonymously. (Emphasis mine.)

Schrenk explains the controversy:

The original difference in meaning between bou,lomai and (ev)qe,lw is disputed in philological investigation. Two diametrically opposing views confront one another. a. The one finds in qe,lein impulsive and unconscious desire, and in bou,lesqai rational and conscious. evqe,lein thus signifies volition by inclination or natural instinct, the proclivitas animi e desiderio, while bou,lesqai denotes a decision of the will based on deliberate resolve, the consilium secundum deliberationem. b. On the other hand, evqe,lein is understood to mean the resolution of the spirit, and bou,lesqai as desire or inclination, as the wish of the soul.

Considering the evidence, Schrenk states:

It is difficult to decide between them because at a very early date the two groups overlap. Hence the only course is to study the usage in different periods. The following results accrue from such historical investigation. In Homer there are 38 instances of bou,lomai and 294 of evqe,lw. bou,lomai always has here the sense of "to prefer," "to choose," whereas evqe,lw is used for all the other nuances of volition. Thus evqe,lw is the older and more comprehensive term. It is particularly loved by the poets, whereas bou,lomai is preferred by the prose writers and predominates from the time of Herodotus. In time it replaces evqe,lein so fully that always in Thuc., Isocr., and Lycurg., and mostly in Plato, Lysias, Andocides, Aeschines and Demosth., this is restricted to its original sense of being ready or inclined. In Polybius, and also Diodorus, evqe,lein notably retreats into the background. Yet in the NT, and also in Epict., the relationship is reversed and evqe,lein is more common. In modern Gk. bou,lomai has been almost completely crowded out by qe,lw.

If a decision must be made concerning the original meaning, the fact that "to prefer" or "to choose" (often with h;) seems to be the first sense of bou,lomai in Homer and Herodotus strongly favours the view, inaugurated by Ammonius, that bou,lomai originally means volition on the basis of choice, preference or decision. Latter there develops the general sense of desiring, wishing, purposing and striving, with an emphasis on the active element. A weaker sense sometime attested is "to mean" or "to think."

So, we see that in early Classical Greek bou,lomai had the sense of volitional choice guided by the intellect or plan in contrast to emotional desire or wish. However, with the passage of time that sense gradually was eroded.

III. Septuagint Usage of bou,lomai

In the Septuagint the terms bou,lomai and qe,lw are used with roughly equal frequency. Schrenk sees more to this than the historical contest between the two terms:

In the LXX the two words are almost equal numerically; bou,lomai is very slightly in the lead. This is not merely due to the fact that the LXX belongs to the age when the distinctions were being obliterated by the struggle between the terms. It also owes something to the fact that the Canon includes both historical and poetical sections, so that the words preferred by both the prose authors (--> supra; Polyb., Diod. S.) and the poets are accepted.

So the type of literature is a factor in the interpretation of bou,lomai in the Septuagint. If we are dealing with poetry, the emotional usage will predominate and the meaning will tend to merge with qe,lw. On the other hand, if we are dealing with prose we can expect the volitional and intellectual usage to predominate and the meaning will tend to be distinct from qe,lw.

Although bou,lomai can have a wide range of meaning, it is often used of volitional choice based on intellectual activity. Schrenk notes:

It is often used for determined refusal, but also for the royal will, caprice and especially the divine resolve and will. This shows that it is not thought of as merely the desire of the heart or wish of the soul.

Müller agrees and points out that bou,lomai is often used for God’s will:

boulomai can express the most varied nuances of meaning in general human volition, but is also very commonly used for the will of God (e.g. Isa. 1:11; 53:10, 1 Sam. 1:25).

Müller also notes that the meanings of the noun bou,lh in the Septuagint favor deliberate choice:

boulê also occurs well over 100 times in the LXX by contrast with thelêma (only some 25 times), . . . . It denotes (a) the weighty preconsideration which precedes the effecting of the will (e.g. Deut. 32:28). It can even be found in the sense of "wisdom" (e.g. Prov. 2:11; 8:12). The Spirit "of counsel", i.e. of considered reflection, is a gift of God (Isa. 11:2); (b) counsel (e.g. Isa. 9:6 as a characteristic of the messiah) and advice, whether good (Gen. 49:6; 1 Ki. 12:8) or foolish (Ps. 1:1; Isa. 19:11); (c) as in secular Gk., the council as a political institution, e.g. the assembly of the people (1 Macc. 14:22), the deliberation of such a board (Jud. 2:2), and the resolution of an assembly (3 Macc. 7:17); (d) also, and above all, the counsel or purpose of God (e.g. "The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to naught . . . the counsel of the LORD stands for ever", Ps. 33 [32]:10 f.; "Thou dost guide me with thy counsel", Ps. 73 [72]:24). God’s purposes are trustworthy and true; Israel can therefore rely on them (Isa. 25:1). His purpose includes Israel’s salvation (Isa. 14:26; cf. also Isa. 5:19; Mic. 4:12).

Schrenk notes a similar usage in Philo’s writings:

The basic sense of "to prefer" occurs also in Philo. There are many examples of the sense of inner intention or striving. Above all, the ideas of wishing and intending are again to the fore. Here, too, we often have the sense of zealous and resolute volition, especially in terms of religious aspiration. On innumerable occasions it is used of the divine will, of God’s goal in creation, of His purpose in Scripture, of His providence, of His guidance of the soul. . . . Especially common are statements concerning the intention of Scripture, the Lawgiver and the Law.

Therefore, even though some merging of bou,lomai with qe,lw has occurred by the time of the Septuagint, there are several factors that would lead us to see as a deliberate resolute volitional choice: (1) the text is prose, (2) the noun bou,lh is used, (3) the text refers to the deliberative activity of men or a body of men, and (4) the text uses bou,lomai of God.

IV. New Testament Koine’ Usage of bou,lomai

Vine asserts that bou,lomai, "usually expresses the deliberate exercise of volition more strongly than No. 1 [qe,lw]. . ." He also sees boulh,ma as, "a deliberate design, that which is purposed." Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich define bou,lomai as:

wish, be willing (no longer difft. in mng. fr. qe,lw. . . .

1. of the pers. desiring someth.: wish, want, desire w. inf. foll. . . .

2. of decisions of the will after previous deliberation – a. of human beings -- . . . . b. of God. . .

and boulh,ma as, "intention. . . pure purpose. . . desire. . . Of God’s will. . . ." boulh, is defined as:

1. . . . purpose, counsel. . . motives of the heart. . . plans. . . .

2. resolution, decision -- a. of men. . . . b. of the divine will. . . .

3. council meeting.

and bou,lhsij, which is only found in Koine’ outside of the New Testament, as, "will." Thayer defines bou,lomai as, "1. commonly, to will deliberately, have a purpose, be minded. . . . 2. of willing as an affection, to desire. . . ." and boulh,ma as, "will, counsel, purpose. . ."

bou,lomai is used thirty-seven times in the New Testament. Thirty of those times refer to human activity. Of those references only one (Matt. 1:19) clearly bears the sense of "deliberate counsel." It is used five times in the sense of "intend" (Acts 5:28, 33; 12:4; 2 Cor. 1:15, 17), once as "unwilling (Acts 18:15 (ouv bou,lomai) and thrice as willing (Mk. 15:15; Acts 25:20; 28:18). The remainder of the uses bear the sense of "wish, desire, or want" (Jn. 18:39; Acts 15:37; 17:20; 18:27; 19:30; 22:30; 23:28; 25:22; 27:43; Phil. 1:12; 1 Tim. 2:8; 5:14; 6:9; Tit. 3:8; Philemon 1:13; Js. 3:4; 4:4; 2 Jn. 1:12; 3 Jn. 1:10; Jude 1:5). However, in the instances that deal with God, there is a different pattern. There are five instances that are clearly deliberative choice (Matt. 11:27; Lk. 10:22; 1 Cor. 12:11; Heb. 6:17; Js. 1:18) and two that bear the sense of "wish" (Lk. 22:42 (parallel to qe,lhma) and 2 Pet. 3:9. Peter writes that God, "not wishing for any to perish mh. boulo,meno,j tinaj avpole,sqai." However, Scripture is clear that some will perish. God, being omniscient, would have to plan for that. Therefore, 2 Pet. 3:9 must bear the sense of wish or it could be taken in support of Universalism.

boulh,ma is found only three times in the New Testament. It is used of God’s irresistible will in Rom. 9:19. Paul’s rhetorical heckler asks, "Why does He [God] still find fault? For who resists His will? tw/| ga.r boulh,mati auvtou/ ti,j avnqe,sthkenÈ" "Resists" avnqe,sthken is a perfect active indicative of avnqi,sthmi -- "to stand against." That is, "who has stood against in the past and continued standing until the present" or, in other words, "who has successfully resisted God’s will?" In Acts 27:43 it is used of human intentions. In 1 Pet. 4:3 it is used of human desire. So boulh,ma seems to refer to a deliberative plan when referring to God but, some ambiguity exists when it is used of men. However, since in two out three uses it refers to a deliberate plan, that should be the presumptive meaning.

boulh, is used twelve times in the New Testament all of which appear to mean deliberative volition. Five references are to human plans (Lk. 23:51, Acts 5:38; 27:12, 42; 1 Co. 4:5), the other seven refer to God’s will (Lk. 7:30, Acts 2:23; 4:28; 13:36; 20:27; Eph. 1:11; Heb. 6:17). The rejection of God’s purpose mentioned in Lk. 7:30 refers to the Pharisees refusal to accept John’s baptism. John’s baptism was in God’s plan but they "rejected" hvqe,thsan it. hvqe,thsan is an aorist active indicative of avqete,w -- "regard as nothing, set aside." The verse shows the failure of their attitude not God’s plan. In Acts 2:23 "predetermined érismenÍ" is a perfect passive participle and implies a state of completion. God’s plan stands complete. It is not being adjusted. The two nouns are joined with ka‹ but only the first noun has a definite article. According to Granville Sharp’s Rule, this construction tÐ érismenÍ boulÐ ka‹ prognësei indicates that counsel boulÐ and foreknowledge prognësei refer to the same thing in this context. Wuest observes:

In Acts 2:23 we have, "Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God." These words are in a construction in the Greek text which shows that the word "foreknowledge" refers to the same thing to which the word "counsel" refers.

Eph 1:11 states that God "works all things after the counsel of His will tou/ ta. pa,nta evnergou/ntoj kata. th.n boulh.n tou/ qelh,matoj auvtou/." This shows that God’s will (tou/ qelh,matoj auvtou) is comprehensive (tou/ ta. pa,nta evnergou/ntoj) and deliberative (kata. th.n boulh.n). Salmond comments:

Here, therefore, the will of God which acts in His foreordaining purpose or decree, in being declared to have its boulh, or "counsel," is set forth as acting not arbitrarily, but intelligently and by deliberation, not without reason, but for reasons hidden it may be from us, yet proper to the Highest Mind and Most Perfect Moral Nature. "They err," says Hooker, with reference to this passage, "who think that of God’s will there is no reason except His will" (Ecc. Pol., i., 2).

Hebrews 6:17 teaches us the "unchangeableness of His purpose th/j boulh/j auvtou/." To summarize, boulh, seems to consistently mean "deliberative volitional plan." This is especially true when boulh, is used of God’s plan, which is unchangeable, deliberate, comprehensive, and equivalent to His foreknowledge.

A few final observations are in order. bou,lhsij does not appear in the New Testament. It is worthy of note that, in the eight occurrences of related verb bouleu,omai and its noun form bouleuth,j in the New Testament (Mk. 15:43; Lk. 14:31; 23:50; Jn. 11:53; 12:10; Acts 27:39; 2 Cor. 1:17), they are always used in the sense of "resolute counsel" or "counselor."

V. Conclusions

First, we may deduce a linguistic pattern in the New Testament Koine’ Greek interpretation of bou,lomai and related words:

a. The verb form is the more flexible. It may mean either "desire", "intend" or "plan deliberately." In prose it is more likely to mean "plan deliberately" and in poetry it is more likely to mean "desire."

b. When the verb is used of God, the majority of instances will mean "plan deliberately," the possible exceptions being Lk. 22:42 and 2 Pet. 3:9.

c. Of the nouns boulh,ma probably means "deliberate plan" and boulh, certainly does, especially if used of God.

Second, several observations may be made as to God’s plan:

a. God does not derive emotional satisfaction from the eternal loss of sinners (2 Pet. 3.9).

b. God’s will is comprehensive, and deliberative not arbitrary (Eph. 1:11).

c. God’s plan is unchangeable (Heb. 6:17).

d. God’s plan is equivalent to His foreknowledge (Acts 2:23).

e. God’s will may not be successfully resisted (Rom. 9:19) even though men may disapprove of it (Lk. 7:30).

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

A Lexicon Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974.

Bauer, Walter, Arndt, William F., and Gingrich, F. Wilbur. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 4th Ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1952.

Salmond, S.D.F. "St. Paul’s Epistle To The Ephesians." The Expositor’s Greek Testament. 5 vols. Ed. W. Robertson Nicoll. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1990.

Thayer, Joseph Henry. Greek-English Lexicon Of The New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1973.

The Bible. The New American Standard Bible.

The Bible. The Septuagint.

The Bible. The UBS Greek New Testament.

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Gen. ed. Colin Brown. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1971. S.v. "Will, Purpose." By D. Müller.

Theological Dictionary Of The New Testament. Ed. Gerhard Kittel. Trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995. S.v. bou,lomai. By G. Schrenk.

Vine, W.E. An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words with their Precise Meanings for English Readers. 4 vols. bound as 1. Old Tappan: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1966. S.v. "Will."

Wuest, Kenneth S. "Bypaths." Wuest’s Word Studies From the Greek New Testament For the English Reader. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1973.