Metonymy

 

Last week 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.

 

Metonymy Defined

 

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.

 

 

Ye often hear it said ...

 

“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).