Some many years ago, a man named Thomas Campbell, a member of the Restoration movement, presented his Declaration And Address in which he included several statements which have become famous. They have been restated, rearranged, and presented in many different ways. I do not have them before me at this time but they have been summed up something like this:

“Speak where the Bible speaks; Be silent where the Bible is silent. Call Bible things by Bible names and do Bible things in Bible ways. In doctrine, unity; In opinion, liberty; and in all things charity.”

What a marvelous statement this is and what a great religious cleansing it would bring about if mankind accepted it. But this statement was not first made by Mr. Campbell as many believe. It was first made by Peter in I Pet. 4:11. The words are not identical but the principle presented is the same.

I would like to state here in passing that I am not a member of the restoration movement. I do appreciate the attitude and the teaching of many of those associated with this movement. But I am simply a member of the new testament church, no more and no less. To align one’s self with a movement other than the church is a grave error and such is seen in the restoration movement. People quote restoration leaders as if they were inspired. People use them as definitive proof of positions held. They never claimed for themselves such authority and they never had any such authority. They were just men seeking to understand the will of God.

Having said that, I must also say that I am amazed at how many people endorse the above statement with their lips and reject it in their study and in their lives. It reminds me of the statement found in Is. 29:13 and quoted by the Lord in Matt. 15:7-9. It is a sad thing to be verbally right and practically wrong.

In this chapter we are going to be looking at several issues concerning language itself. We will not have time or space to cover them all. But we will attempt to give enough information in this section so that the dedicated and vigilant Bible student will gain an appreciation of the necessity of considering language and word usage as he searches the Scriptures. We will include in our bibliography other sources where you can continue this section of study.

1. Idioms.

We are going to begin with the subject of idioms. An idiom is a linguistic phrase which is peculiar to a particular group. All languages and all people have them and if one does not understand them then he can become confused as to the meaning involved. Let’s look at a few examples in our culture.

If someone in our society is hard to convince or to teach we might call him mule headed. I have been called such on several occasions (and it may be true). But, in all fairness, my head is not identical or similar to that of a mule. In fact, it is much more identifiable with the head of a bulldog. But someone from another culture, hearing me described as mule headed, might get an awful mental image of my physical appearance. This is an idiom, a phrase peculiar to our culture, and is not easily understood when literally translated into a different language with a different culture.

Our language contains literally thousands of such idioms. We say “get down” for dancing or partying, “a twisted mind” for someone who does not think clearly or rationally, “sugar coat” for choosing an easy way of telling someone something that could be offensive, and the list goes on. These phrases have developed over the years in our language and new ones are being born every day. While we understand them because they are a part of our language, those foreign to our language and culture will not.

The Bible also contains within its pages many such idioms. The people who lived at the time of its writing understood these idioms clearly. But to us many of these phrases are unfamiliar. In the work of translation, many of these idioms are easy to deduce and understand. But if translated literally some idioms would be either unclear or meaningless. Others can even be confusing or misleading. We will look at just a few so that we can understand this problem.

In the time of Christ, to break bread meant to eat a meal. This was an idiom not only of the Jewish people but of the Arabs as well. It, however, is such a clear idiom that we can read it and easily deduce what is under consideration. But other idioms, such as using the term “honor” to mean financial support (I Tim. 3:3-4, I Tim. 3:17-18) are sometimes confusing or unclear to the reader.

The phrase “Day of the Lord” is another idiom that has caused confusion. This term is a Jewish idiom meaning any great event brought about by God. But some have taken this phrase from many locations and, since these phrases are similar or often identical, have concluded that they all deal with the same event. This confusion is caused by not knowing that this phrase is an idiom.

There are some idioms, if translated literally, would cause great confusion and could even lead to error. We will discuss two of them here.

The First Day Of The Week.

This term found in Acts 20:7 is translated from a phrase which, if literally translated, would be “And on the one of the Sevens” or “On the one of the Sabbaths.” If one were to read this and not realize it was an idiom, he might believe the church met of the early part of the Sabbath day. But the Jewish people used the term Sabbath to mean week. Their days were numbered, not named. Therefore, the first of the seven is the first day of the week, the second of the seven is the second day of the week, and so on. The translators knew this, and so the KJV, NKJV, AS (1901), NAS, and even the untrustworthy NIV translate it “the first day of the week.” To translate this phrase word-for-word would actually be a bad translation because it would not convey the thought of the writer. Sometimes an idiom is adjusted by a translator to avoid confusion.

The Husband Of One Wife.

This phrase which is found in I Tim. 3:2 is translated from a phrase which, if literally translated, would be “of one woman a man.” But in the Jewish culture there is no word for husband nor is there a word for wife. They used the word man (aner) for husband and the word woman (gunaikos) for wife. The phrase “of one woman the man” was a Jewish idiom, then, for the husband of one wife, and so recognized the translators of the KJV, NKJV, AS (1901), NAS, and even the untrustworthy NIV. This consistency of translation came from the knowledge that this was a Jewish idiom and that a word-for-word translation would cause grave error and not convey the idea of the writer.

2. Figures Of Speech – Metonymy.

There are a number of figures of speech found in Scripture that if misunderstood could cause doctrinal confusion. One such figure is called metonymy. This is where one thing is stated in the place of another. There are various forms of this figure of speech but we will give just a few examples.

“Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan.”
Matt. 3:5

Now we understand that the city and the country did not go out to John. Rather, the inhabitants went out. But the regions and cities were listed in the place of the inhabitants.

“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ . . .”
I Cor. 10:16

In this passage the cup is mentioned but the fruit of the vine is really under consideration. Thus, we have the container listed for that which was contained.

“Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.”
Luke 16:29

Here the writers of the Scriptures are listed in place of the Scriptures. All of these, and many more, are examples of metonymy, the placing of one thing for another.

3. Figures Of Speech – Hyperbole.

A hyperbole is a statement which is greatly exaggerated. When Peter asked Christ if he should forgive his brother seven times, Christ responded that he should forgive him seventy times seven. Christ did not mean that this was the magic number when forgiveness stopped. He meant that one should forgive his brother as often as necessary, whatever amount of times that would require (Matt. 18:21-22).

4. Figures Of Speech – Synecdoche.

This form of speech is when a part of something is listed for the whole or the whole for a part. Let us consider Prov. 6:16-19 as we discuss this figure.

“These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination to him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood. An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.”

In this passage, God is not displeased, for example, with only the hands that shed innocent blood but with the owner of those hands as well. This is the putting of the part for the whole. In fact, this list is a synecdoche in that it contains part of the list of the things that God hates as a representation of the whole of the things He hates. This figure is fairly common in scripture.

5. Figures Of Speech – Personification.

This figure of speech is when one assigns characteristics to an inanimate object which are generally assigned to one that is animate. In Psalm 65:12 the hills rejoice and in the next verse the valleys shout for joy and sing. These are examples of personification.

6. Figures Of Speech – Simile.

This figure of speech is when one thing is compared to another. Generally an allegory or a parable would fall into this category. When Peter said a day and a thousand years to God are the same, he was presenting a simile (II Pet. 3:8). It was never intended to suggest to man that we can substitute the one for the other. Yet this is the very thing that some seek to do in prophesy and prediction of the end of time, etc.

7. Figures Of Speech – Metaphor.

This figure of speech is when a word or phrase is applied to something that it does not really denote in order to suggest a comparison. Earlier in this text we mentioned connotative and denotative meanings. In that section we discussed the fact that when Christ called Herod a fox that he used that term connotatively. The actual figure He used in that passage was a metaphor. Had He stated that Herod was like a fox it would have been a simile.

8. Figures Of Speech – Parable.

There is a difference of usage between the old and new testaments in relation to this figure of speech. In the old testament it seems more loosely used and relates more to simple comparisons, stories, reflections, and so on. In the new testament, however, it comes from a word meaning to lay along side of and is usually defined as an earthly story with a heavenly meaning. Christ mostly uses this figure of speech in relation to the kingdom.

9. Figures Of Speech – Allegory.

This figure of speech uses veiled or figurative language to carry across some concept which is implied but not stated. It is often referred to as an extended metaphor. The apostle Paul uses this term in Gal. 4:24 when he draws comparisons from Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Isaac, and Ishmael.

There are many other types or figures of speech which we will not spend time discussing. Our purpose here is only to introduce the student to the idea that care must be exercised when one is ascertaining the meaning of Scripture when such is used by the writer. Actually, this is not really so very hard and common sense plays a great role in proper understanding of these things. Do not be intimidated by figures of speech, simply be aware of them so that you will understand them properly. There are a number of books on figures of speech, some good and some bad. I suggest a good English book and a good dictionary will go far in helping the student better understand and appreciate the use of figures in language.

10. Revelation – Apocalyptic Language.

The Greek word translated “revelation” in the new testament is a word which literally means to uncover, lay bare, make naked, or reveal. It is often used in the Scriptures concerning the revealing of the will of God which was previously unknown. In the final book of the new testament is the revelation of the events which the church would shortly witness. This unveiling is done in language which is veiled in its presentation and not to be taken word-for-word, but is largely symbolic and figurative. Such is the nature of most prophesy and to attempt to assign literal interpretation to apocalyptic literature is to do injury and injustice to the text.

As one views the book of Revelation, then, he must view it as a book of figures designed to reveal the coming events the church would experience. Interpretation of this type material is dependent on the reader being familiar with the meaning of the figures used in the text. The interpretation is based on the way those figures were applied at the time of the writing and not how one might wish to apply them today.

11. Types.

Types are figures given in Scripture which typify or represent someone or something in such a manner as to teach a particular fact about their nature. The old testament is full of types, i.e. items which are spoken of in the old testament which represent things which are found in the new testament. Thus Adam was a contrasting type of Christ (Rom. 5:17-18, I Cor. 15:21-23) while Melchisedec was a similar type (Heb. 5:1-10, Heb. 7:1-24).

The study of types can be one of the most rewarding studies the student of the Bible can ever undertake because through it a wealth of information can be uncovered. One can find that those things located in the tabernacle were actually types of things in the new covenant. Things in the old law typified things in the new. Events were types of future events. Truly the law was designed to bring us to Christ (Gal. 3:24).

12. Purpose Defines Application.

One must always consider the purpose of an action or teaching if he is to understand what is being taught. Many times in figurative or parabolic language one tries to find more than is really there. This can lead to disaster. Sometimes students assign to those things which are figurative a literal application, again causing disaster. Then some take those things which are literal and try to make them into figures, again threatening great disaster. One must use caution and one must consider the purpose of the writer in any interpretation he might apply to the Scriptures under consideration.

As we conclude this section of study let me again state that the honest and vigilant student of the Bible need not be intimidated by this section of studies nor of the figures he will encounter in the revealed will of God. Common sense coupled with honesty and diligent searching of the Scriptures will provide the answers needed for a proper application of the word of God.