Need help finding a good greek dictionary

[Kevin]

Anybody know a good "lesikov" that covers most of the attic, patristic, and ionic writing. I prefer one written by a native-speaking Greek.

I've run into some problems with translations between Koine and Modern that have me wondering, but I don't have any way to check my theory.

Any help you can give is MOST welcome.

[Kevin]

Thanks for the views. I think I've found what I was looking for.

Here's what I'm thinking.

The English language has changed over time, but usually through expansion or contraction of definitions or through new words (usually borrowed) being added. Not usually through a complete change of definition of a particular word.

e.g. The definition of "intimate" contracts to only include the sensual meaning, or the word "patio" is added to the language from Spanish to give us another word for "porch" which in itself is a shortened Latin word.

Koine Greek, which was used in the Biblical writings, was supposed to be a middle ground in this way between Attic and Modern according to most Greek scholars. As such, the incidentals of the language should have much the same meaning with the exception of the expansion or contraction of meanings between Attic and modern.

I'm thinking the only major difference should be the semitic influence of proper nouns and Judeo-Christian only words.

Since most native Greek language scholars study Attic as the scholars language of ancient Greece, and the majority of surviving writing of the time is in Attic, it provides a more abundant reference source for translation.

Outside the semitic influence words, modern and Attic should both be referenced as well as the Koine references or instead of the Koine references when the Koine references don't agree in any way with modern or Attic and the Koine seems to have gone on a tangent from the two.

Most (if not all) of the Koine references we have today are from church leaders. While I have lots of respect for the study these people have done, their main area of study was not language and most were not native speaking Greeks. This could lead to some exegetical errors. From what I'm seeing they're probably minor ones, but why settle for almost correct translation?

The mistakes I'm seeing are ones that would explain misunderstandings of the past. They would 1)remove the burden of guilt of older generations for misconceptions and 2)show that the Christian world is now more on the correct path than they've ever been.

It looks to me like lots of good can come from a study of this type. It would also account for differences of wording between Greek and Hebrew text translations of the OT where Greek was quoted in the NT. That could be used as a tool to reach Jews and Islam with the fact that Jesus was Messiah maybe.

I may be reaching with this, but I'm trying not to read anything into the translation. Literal meanings should suffice for a study of this type. That keeps me out of the equation-- a common problem with exegesis from what I've read. Then, other people with more knowledge than myself can pick up where I left off and do the actual translation.

At this point, I don't have the reference work in hand, so I'm not even sure if my theory is correct. So don't read too much into this. It's just questions I have.