Figures of
Speech
.!23!.
WHAT THEY ARE
A figure of speech is a form of expression which uses words to mean
something different from their ordinary sense. This is done to emphasize and draw
attention to what is said. A couple of these relate specifically to our present study:
the metaphor and the synedoche. A clear understanding of them will enhance our
ability to interpret God’s word.
METAPHOR
A metaphor is an expression where something is referred to as though it were
something else. This is done on the basis of some principle of likeness or similarity
which they possess. For example, David said:
The LORD is my rock... (II Samuel 22:2).
Of course, this does not mean that God is made of stone. Instead, it indicates that
the Lord is an enduring source of security and strength.
How does this relate to our study?
Throughout this presentation, the
literal reality of hell has been stressed. However, there are ocasions when the word
“hell” is used figuratively. For instance, Isaiah tells Israel that:
...thou...didst debase thyself even unto hell (lAavi = SHE-OL) (Isaiah 57:9).
That was the lowest possible degradation.
Jesus speaks in a similar manner when He said:
And thou, Capernaum,
which art exalted to heaven,
shalt be thrust down to hell (a[|dhj = HA-DES), (Luke 10:15).
Since no one of whom He spoke had been to heaven literally, “heaven” must be a
metaphor of the prosperity and beauty of this city which was situated on the
89
northwest shore of the blue lake of Galilee. Likewise, “hell” must represent the
depth of ruin into which this city would fall, and the loss of all its external
greatness.
Let no one suggest, however, that since “hell” can be used figuratively, it can
never refer to a literal place. Such would be quite a rash statement since, on the
same basis, one could likewise claim that “heaven” never refers to a literal place
either.
Jonah also used “hell” in a figurative sense. He was as good as dead when
the great fish swallowed him. Being in the belly of that fish reminded him of the
unseen world of Sheol. So he could say:
Out of the belly of hell (lAavi = SHE-OL) cried I (Jonah 2:2d).1
The fact that “hell” can be used as a metaphor is indeed significant. It
indicates there is a real hell. The figurative use of anything proves that there
must be a literal aspect of it somewhere. When David calls God a “rock,” it
means that there has to be a real rock somewhere. When God calls Israel “His
vineyard” (Isaiah 5:1), it declares the reality of such a thing as an actual vineyard.
In the same way, the figurative use of “hell” gives evidence to the real one.
There can be no shadow without the substance.
SYNECDOCHE
A synecdoche is an expression where a part of something is given the name
of the whole thing (synecdoche of the whole), or where the whole thing is given the
name of just a part of it (synecdoche of the part). Some examples may elucidate.
1
Synecdoche of the whole:
And God looked upon the earth,
and, behold, it was corrupt (Genesis 6:12).
Only a part of God’s earthly creation had been corrupted with sin — that was
mankind. Nonetheless, when God spoke of that part (mankind), He referred to it by
the name of the whole (“the earth”).
5 Then went out to him [John the Baptist]
Jerusalem, and all Judaea,
and all the region round about Jordan,
6And were baptized of him in Jordan,
confessing their sins (Matthew 3:5-6).
1 There are some who think this meant that Jonah actually died and had prayed to God literally
from Sheol. That seems unlikely to me, although it would not be impossible. Jesus did use this
event in the life of Jonah as a type of His own death, burial and resurrection (Matthew 12:40).
90
Now the record is clear, not everyone in Jerusalem and Judaea or around Jordan
were baptized of John (Matthew 21:32). So the ones who were baptized are given the
name of the whole group (Jerusalem, all Judaea, and all the region around Jordan).
2
Synecdoche of the part:
Judas said:
I have betrayed the innocent blood (Matthew 27:4).
Of course, Judas betrayed all of Jesus, not just His blood. So the whole person is
referred to by the name of only a part of Him (“blood”).
Peter, in his indictment of the Jews, said:
Him [Jesus]... ye have taken,
and by wicked hands have crucified and slain (Acts 2:23).
Hands, by themselves, are not wicked. It was wicked people (not just their hands)
that crucified the Lord. Be that as it may, these people are simply called “hands.”
A part of them is put for the whole.
How does this relate to our study?
1
Consider the following —
Synecdoche of the whole:
When someone dies, the nonmaterial part separates and leaves the material
part of that individual. Thereupon, each separated part is referred to in terms of
the whole person.
A)
The separated, nonmaterial part of man is alluded to as the whole
person.
When Jacob thought his beloved son, Joseph, had been devoured by some
wild animal, he said:
I will go down into Sheol (lAavi KJV: the grave)
unto my son mourning.
As indicated earlier,2 Jacob did not expect to be buried with his son. So he did not
anticipate a union of their dead bodies in the grave. He looked forward, instead, to
a reunion of their personalities in Sheol.
The words “I” and “son” normally refer to complete individuals — including
both physical and spiritual parts. However, in this passage, “I” and “son” refer
only to the spiritual or nonmaterial part of those individuals.
When Lazarus died (Luke 16:22),3 the angels carried him to Abraham’s bosom
2 For a further exposition of this passage, see pages 15-16.
3 For a further exposition of this passage, see pages 6-11.
91
or Paradise. The angels did not take his body with them, just his spirit/soul part.
Yet this nonmaterial part of Lazarus (his conscious personality) is still called “Lazarus”
— even though it was just a part of him.
Likewise, in the same passage, when the rich man dies, his body is buried.
Yet, in the subsequent verses, the conscious, nonmaterial part of the rich man
(which finds itself in Hades) is addressed as “he,” “my,” “I,” and “thou.” So the
nonmaterial part of a man is alluded to by the same terms as one would
normally refer to the whole person.
B) The separated, material part of a man is also referred to as the whole
person.
Three months after Jacob died, and he (the nonmaterial part of him) had
already “been gathered unto his people,” Joseph and his brothers buried him (the
material part) (Genesis 49:33-50:14).4 The dead, physical part is still called “his
father” (Genesis 50:7) — even though it was just a part of him.
When the widow’s son died, Elijah prayed:
O LORD my God,
I pray thee,
let this child’s soul
come into him again (I Kings 17:21).
The “him” in this verse refers only to the body. So just a part of the child (the
body) is designated by a pronoun (“him”) which usually indicates the entire person.
Likewise, when Ananiah died, the young men of the church —
...carried him out,
and buried him (Acts 5:6c).
Of course, they only carried and buried the material part.
Therefore, it is not contradictory to speak of a deceased Christian as being
“with the Lord” (II Corinthians 5:8), and, at the same time, refer to “his burial” (Acts
8:2) in some grave. Each phrase is understood to reflect a synecdoche of the whole.
Only the nonmaterial part is “with the Lord,” while the physical part is buried.
Nevertheless, both parts can still be referred to grammatically in terms of
the whole person.
2
Synecdoche of the part:
When God told Adam:
...dust thou art,
4 For a further exposition of this passage, see pages 14-15.
92
and unto dust shalt thou return (Genesis 3:19d ),
the whole man was referred to in terms of only a part (the physical).
However, man is more than the sum of his total physical parts (“dust”). This,
of course, demonstrates the limitation of figurative language. It usually never
offers the complete picture. Consequently, this statement was not intended to
exhaust God’s revelation about man’s nature.
When God —
...breathed into his [Adam’s] nostrils (Genesis 2:7b),
He gave man something which was not derived from —
...the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7a).
Only the physical part of man can return to the dust. That which did not come
from the dust cannot return to the dust. The spirit of man (his nonmaterial part)
is not biodegradable.
Therefore, one should not assume that God’s statement to Adam in Genesis
3:19 gives a complete description of man’s total composition or destiny. Among
many other Scriptures, Ecclesiastes 12:7 offers a further revelation regarding the
distinct destinies of the physical and nonmaterial parts of man:
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was:
and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.5
CONCLUSION
Words are vehicles of ideas. The same word may not always carry the same
connotation.
One cannot ignore figures of speech and arrive at the correct
interpretation. However, one must also recognize the inherent limitations of a
figure of speech. Since by its very nature, figurative language uses words to mean
something different from their ordinary sense, one needs to be very careful not
distort their significance.
5 For an exposition of this passage, see pages 64-65.
93