Think on These Things
January 2001
Last
month we talked about the common “not ... but ...” language construct that
is found commonly throughout the New Testament.
We warned of errors that are often created by isolating the “not”
part of the statement from the rest of the context.
Although quite different in structure, the misunderstanding of the
metonymy figure of speech often has the same effect — that of creating the
impression that the bible teaches something when, in fact, it does not.
An
example of this figure is in Mt. 19:18 where a man asked Jesus which commands he
must follow. Jesus responded with
just six short commands. We know
that Jesus was not saying that these six were all the commands of God that we
need to worry about (see Mt. 5:18f). Rather,
he was giving the part to represent the whole (Mt. 4:4). He was presenting a sampling in order to point to the entire
law of God.
Such
abbreviated speech is quite common to us today. Someone might say: “I am going to the store.”
That, in a nutshell describes several hours of activity, from dressing
appropriately, to operating a motor vehicle, to making a few stops along the
way, to making several purchases and returning.
The statement: “I am going to the store” implies all of this, and the
person making it is certainly not considered a liar if she fails to restrict
herself to the bare minimum activities of strictly going to the store (to say
nothing of returning).
Remember
that the biblical writers wrote for the common person in language that we can
all understand. It was not
mathematical jargon or legalese. One
verse is not to be isolated and taken out of context.
Rather it must be combined with all that God has to say on the subject
throughout the bible in order to arrive at the full truth.
Back to the Contents
The goal of this page is to promote morality and justice in our society (Prov. 14:23).
Clarification
on Abortion.
We should all be glad that our eternal destiny is determined by a just
and merciful God, and not the vote of some electorate or court.
Some might think they will be able to call for a “recount,” or plead
their case. But a careful reading
of the story of Lazarus and the rich man (Luke 16:19f) indicates that the
perfect judgment of God will not be subject to any appeals whatsoever.
There
are other things that are not subject to debate.
One of them is the fact that abortion is murder.
Proponents of what they call “the right to choose” have no problem in
denying the child’s right to choose life.
Several years ago they argued that no abortions would be performed after
the first trimester. But the
pressure that caused President Clinton to veto the bill to ban partial birth
abortion (twice) proves that they have no regard at all for human life.
Those who vote for candidates who refuse to speak out against such brutal
infanticide should be forced to witness this cruel procedure.
Perhaps they will in eternity. God
hates hands that shed innocent blood (Prov. 6:17).
Rev. 21:8: "But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and
murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their
part {will be} in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the
second death." Few of these
categories do not apply to the abortionist.
And if to him, then why not also to those who promote what he does?
This is exactly what we do if we vote for and promote candidates who
refuse to oppose this greatest of injustices.
We
should all be glad that our eternal destiny is determined by a just and merciful
God. We should be. But those
who practice and promote abortion will only be glad if they repent and turn to
the Lord.
[Note:
we received criticism that we were not being clear enough on the subject of
abortion. We appreciate this, and
hope that this article makes the biblical position and its consequences totally
understandable. The TTT web site
has additional articles on the subject.]
Back to the Contents
[We
thank Paul Bellenboyer for his suggestions for this article.]
Metonymy
(Greek: "change of name") is "a figure in which one word is
substituted for another on the basis of some material, causal, or conceptual
relation" (The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, p.783).
An example is given — the substitution of drinking vessel for contents,
"I'll have a glass." Indeed,
Jesus used that figure when he said (1 Cor 11:25): “This cup is the new
covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink {it,} in remembrance of
Me.” Clearly Jesus was not asking
them to do the impossible. (A
strict literal interpretation would require us to drink that particular cup.)
Recognizing that Jesus was talking about the contents (and not the cup
itself) helps us to refute those who insist on using only one cup.
"Jerusalem,
Zion, Israel" often serves as a metonym for a wider grouping. "Sons of
Israel" for all of Israel. Metonymy
is also used as "a mode of signification wherein the part stands for the
whole, and the text or version is enriched by an unspoken context that dwarfs
the textual artifact" (Foley, John Miles. Immanent Art: From Structure to
Meaning in Traditional Oral Epic. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, 1991.
p.7).
In
1st John, the apostle states that “God is light” (1:5) and “God is love”
(4:8, etc.). These can best be
understood if we see that John is emphasizing major characteristics of God; he
is not giving an exclusive definition. This
is not all that God is.
Consider
I Jn. 4:2-3: “By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses
that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does
not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the {spirit} of the antichrist,
of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
Obviously this is not the only way to “test the spirits.”
John is merely giving an example (of effort), which stands for the whole.
Similarly,
Jesus said (Jn. 13:14) "If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your
feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet.” This entire example stands for all of the services that we
should render to those in need; to turn this into a ritual or restrict it to
washing feet misses the point.
As
you study your bible, be looking for this figure; it will appear far more than
you expect.
Back to the Contents
“John 3:16 teaches that we are
saved by faith only.”
but
this does not allow for Jesus’ use of metonymy.
The
bible does not ever state that we are saved by faith only. These two words come together in only one place in the bible
(James 2: 24), where it says “faith only” does not save. But just presenting a counter passage does not solve the
problem. What does John 3:16 mean?
The
plan of salvation is presented collectively in the book of Acts, where several
examples of conversions are given. Elsewhere
it is most often referenced by metonymy. That
is, one of the components of salvation is used to reference all of the others.
Consider the following conditions of salvation as given by Jesus:
Hearing
and learning (Jn. 6:44f)
Belief
(Jn. 3:16)
Repentance
(Mt. 4:17)
Confession
of Jesus as Lord (Mt. 10:32)
Baptism
(John 3:5; see Rom. 6:3)
Faithfulness
until death (Rev. 2:10)
Each
one of these verses uses the part to represent the whole. We can no more say that we are saved by “faith only” than
we can say that we are saved by hearing only, repentance only, baptism only or
works only. Faith is particularly representative of the entire plan of
salvation, since it is a motivation for obedience. Thus, if we have faith, we will be obedient to all of the
commands of our Lord; anything short of this is dead faith (James 2:26).
Back to the Contents